0 INFO-VAX	Sun, 16 Feb 2003	Volume 2003 : Issue 93      Contents: Re: another broken commitment?< Re: DEC's "Ultrix connection" ?? What is now called TCP/IP ?) Re: Hobbyist OpenVMS License registration ; Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems ; Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems ; Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems ; Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems ; Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems ; RE: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems  hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS # Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS  RE: HSZ50 Battery QsM Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" M Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" P Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" foP Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" foP Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" foP Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" fo$ Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5 years ...$ Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5 years ...H Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyH Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyC Re: Inspecting VMS SMTP email contents - ie, Content filter gateway   Re: Java & OSU Web Server on VMS5 Mac file server on 7.3-1 works after VMS731_F11X V1.0 P Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha RetaiP Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha Retai) Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium ) Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium ) Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium ) Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium ) Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium 4 Possible replacements for PSPA (Performance Advisor)$ Re: Read/Write from a global section$ Re: Read/Write from a global section+ Re: Restore of System to a different Server & Re: SIMH 2.10-1 VAX binaries for Win32& Re: SIMH 2.10-1 VAX binaries for Win32& Re: SIMH 2.10-1 VAX binaries for Win322 Re: SKHPC slaps Gartner, naysayers on comp vms ...3 Re: Support for Gigabit Ethernet Clusters on Marvel M Re: [OT] Windows Calculator (was Re: HP hideousness of the OPenVMS web pages)   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 15:09:44 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> ' Subject: Re: another broken commitment? K Message-ID: <YKs3a.700853$F2h1.203452@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>   5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message , news:0SKdnUdg5aJtONCjXTWc3Q@metrocast.net...= > While it's not worth my time digging up the details of HP's  'commitments' toF > continue Compaq's existing plans, one of those plans appears to haveE > suffered a significant modification of late.  A report in comp.arch  >  > F http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=45022fc8.0302112326.2a1d1d72%40po sting.< > google.com ) from one of the ISSCC attendees about an EV79 presentationF > indicates that instead of being the tuned-to-SOI shrink with 3 MB L2 cache @ > planned after EV8 was cancelled, it has now been reduced to an untuned,B > quick-and-dirty shrink with the same 1.75 MB that EV7 has (and a@ > considerably lower speed target).  A brief (so far) discussion
 appears on+ > the News&Views forum at realworldtech.com  >  > F http://www.realworldtech.com/forums/index.cfm?action=detail&PostNum=12 33&Thr" > ead=1&entryID=14653&roomID=11 ). >    Why am I not surprised.    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 20:50:05 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")E Subject: Re: DEC's "Ultrix connection" ?? What is now called TCP/IP ? 6 Message-ID: <00A1B879.3A2A22C4@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  b In article <pan.2003.02.15.12.24.44.122856@stop.spam.org>, "Mariuz" <mariuz@stop.spam.org> writes:A >I have in the source of something like this www.firebirdsql.org: ; >(i want to resurect a port to VMS sometimes in the future)  >  >It says( > *	PROGRAM:	JRD Remote Interface/Server > *	MODULE:		ucx.c2 > *	DESCRIPTION:	TCP/UCP/IP Communications module. > @ >UCP? Will it be a typo from UDP or a specific variant like IPX?J >Second, it contains only wrappers around functions with the vaxc$ prefix,
 >for example:  > @ >int ISC_tcp_accept( int s, struct sockaddr *addr, int *addrlen) >{( >/************************************** > *  > *	I S C _ t c p _ a c c e p t  > * ( > ************************************** > *  > * Functional description$ > *	Accept a connection on a socket. > * ) > **************************************/  > ' >	return vaxc$accept(s, addr, addrlen);  >} >  > L >I have issues with remote/multivx.cpp... I was tempted to remote it in FB1,$ >but finally chickened out. It says:( > *	PROGRAM:	JRD Remote Interface/Server > *	MODULE:		winvx.c, > *	DESCRIPTION:	Interface to Wollongong TCP > L >Probably it was offered in several platforms, but from my memory and if I'mG >not wrong, I only remember Wollongong TCP as an add-on for Windows for  >Workgroups. > G >TCP won the battle as the de-facto protocol for WAN's, do we need this D >specific implementation? Is Wollonwong version used in any platformB >currently? It seems mainly related to VMS and those sys$qio(...),F >sys$hiber() and sys$wake() calls certainly are mystery for me. LatestK >references I found in the net are from 1988, except for a person wanted to  >try an old VAX in 1994.  I Wollongong (which got sold to Attachmate and then retired) is dead.  That K doesn't mean nobody's using it _anywhere_, but you can't, as far as I know,  buy it.   K On reviving this port: you need to figure out who you're trying to support. J If you're willing to restrict yourself to VMS 6.2 and up, DECC version 6.0J and up  (rather than VAXC, which hasn't been updated in something like ten9 years), you should be able to use Unix-like socket calls.   K (Someone will correct me if I'm wrong on this; I think the DECC CRTL writes I to the UCX driver; that's certainly emulated by Multinet and TCPware, the & supported non-HP IP packages for VMS.)  K If you're trying to make your port work on VMS 5.5-2 and up, VAX and Alpha, J VAXC, GNU C, and DECC, CMU TCP/IP, UCX, TCP/IP Services, Multinet, TCPwareE and Wollongong, then you're going to have to learn a heck of a lot of . details about old, dead-end versions of stuff.  K My suggestion is that you go the DECC and socket route.  Most of the people K stuck with VAXen at 5.5-2 are using their machines for production and can't H experiment with freeware anyway.  Hobbyists can get latest and greatest;: pepole in the middle - on at least 6.2 - would be covered.   -- Alan     O =============================================================================== 0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056 M  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025 O ===============================================================================    ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 09:04:51 -05007 From: pechter@shell.monmouth.com (Bill/Carolyn Pechter) 2 Subject: Re: Hobbyist OpenVMS License registration- Message-ID: <b2lhe3$qq4$1@shell.monmouth.com>   * In article <00A1B7DC.26151458.6@decus.de>,& Michael Unger  <unger@decus.de> wrote:C >See http://www.softresint.com/charon-vax/index.htm for details. (I B >hadn't looked there for quite a while.) It is called "PicoVAX forF >Windows", the file is of the type "MSI" ("Windows Installer Package")@ >and obviously requires Win2k. I don't know about the (official)A >license conditions for this emulator product of course but it is # >called a "free hobbyist emulator".  >  >Michael  A Nope... runs fine on Windows98 with the updated Microsoft Windows * installer which is on windows update iirc.  G Put the PicoVAX up on Win98 to see if it would work on 98 at the office 1 before I burned it to CD to take home to install.   B I've also been working with simh on the same box -- so I wanted to
 compare them.    Bill --  M +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ M | Bill and/or Carolyn Pechter    |        pechter@shell.monmouth.com        | M |   Bill Gates is a Persian cat and a monocle away from being a villain in  | N |   a James Bond movie              -- Dennis Miller                        | M +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 11:56:12 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> D Subject: Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems' Message-ID: <3E4E7F3C.B29A91C9@fsi.net>    Russell Wallace wrote: > D > (The exception is when you have two companies that are in the sameF > business and their limiting factor is insufficient economy of scale.  H I don't get this whole "economy of scale" thing. Seems to me, the two inD the same sentence constitute a chicken-and-egg kind of oxymoron: youH can't get the economy without the scale and the scale won't come withoutE the economy. Attempting to achieve scale without economy becomes self B defeating as "supply and demand" kicks in: too much demand and too% little supply puts an end to economy.   B So, which comes first? The "economy" (read "affordability") or the scale?   --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 18:39:32 GMT 7 From: brad@.homeportal.2wire.net (Bradford J. Hamilton) D Subject: Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems- Message-ID: <EPv3a.113355$SD6.5601@sccrnsc03>   [ In article <3E4E7F3C.B29A91C9@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:  >Russell Wallace wrote:  >>  E >> (The exception is when you have two companies that are in the same G >> business and their limiting factor is insufficient economy of scale.  > I >I don't get this whole "economy of scale" thing. Seems to me, the two in E >the same sentence constitute a chicken-and-egg kind of oxymoron: you I >can't get the economy without the scale and the scale won't come without F >the economy. Attempting to achieve scale without economy becomes selfC >defeating as "supply and demand" kicks in: too much demand and too & >little supply puts an end to economy. > C >So, which comes first? The "economy" (read "affordability") or the  >scale?   N I think I'm being set up to provide the answer which David is looking for, but here goes:	:-)  L Companies end up selling a *lot* of product by being affordable (at first). N Think Microsoft Win 3.1/95; certainly not as good a product as O/S 2, but muchL cheaper, more available, and M$ would tend to "look the other way" if people used illegal copies.  M Now fast-forward into NT/ME/W2K/XP...M$ has maret share, can afford to charge O whatever they wish, have enough resources to prosecute pirates, and makes money  hand over fist.   ; Economy always comes first, then scale provides the reward.     >  >--  >David J. Dachtera >dba DJE Systems >http://www.djesys.com/  > ) >Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page:   >http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/  A _________________________________________________________________ 0 Bradford J. Hamilton			"All opinions are my own"/ bMradAhamiPltSon@atMtAbi.cPoSm		"Lose the MAPS"    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 22:13:53 GMT 0 From: rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net (Russell Wallace)D Subject: Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems0 Message-ID: <3e4ebacc.258098096@news.eircom.net>  7 On Sat, 15 Feb 2003 11:56:12 -0600, "David J. Dachtera"  <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote:  1 >I don't get this whole "economy of scale" thing.   @ For example, there've been successful mergers among companies in? businesses like aircraft manufacture. The costs in that sort of E business are big enough that to be good at it it's not enough to just F be a huge company, you have to be a mindbogglingly gigantic one. So myC criticism of mergers shouldn't be taken to mean it's a bad idea for C e.g. Boeing to buy up another company, _if that other company is in  the same business_.   F (Which Sun and Sony, to go back to the original point, aren't. They're nowhere near even close.)    --  3 "Mercy to the guilty is treachery to the innocent." + Remove killer rodent from address to reply. ! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallace    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 19:40:12 -0400 0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>D Subject: Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems/ Message-ID: <3E4ECFDB.CD7AFFD4@vl.videotron.ca>    Russell Wallace wrote:E > criticism of mergers shouldn't be taken to mean it's a bad idea for E > e.g. Boeing to buy up another company, _if that other company is in  > the same business_.  > H > (Which Sun and Sony, to go back to the original point, aren't. They're > nowhere near even close.)   N Boeing buying McDonaldDouglas was just the same as HP buying Compaq: you buy aJ competitor to eliminate the competitor. Boeing is stuck with facilities itM doesn't really need but must politically keep opened.  Buying MCD gave Boeing G an even greater presence in mlitary. Buying Rockewell gave Boeing a big W presence in Military and Space/Satellites. (Hey, the shuttle ios now a Boeing product).   K Sony is the one entity that understood Convergence.  AOL Time Warner, or in ) Canada, BCE , had no clue on convergence.   I Sony makes the movies. Sells the music from those movies. Makes the video M games derived from the movies, and has TV network(s) to air its programs that F feature characters derived from its movies/video games. Sony sells theN walkmans that play the music, sells the DVD and VCRs trhat play the movies andM thd video consoles that play its games. And it owns some TV networks that air K the movies , music etc. And it now has those videogames that connect to the E internet. And guess what, Sony also makes computers now. And it has a K worldwide distribution system geared at consumer goods which is perfect for  commoditized computers.   N Sony and Sun ? Not unless Sony intends to drop Microsoft and push some form of Unix in small laptops/PDAs.       G AOL and BCE were just distributors who offered no content. They brought = nothing to the entities they purchased (such as Time Warner).    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 01:12:32 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> D Subject: Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun MicrosystemsH Message-ID: <4AB3a.58671$Qf1.58226@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  = "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> wrote in message ) news:3E4ECFDB.CD7AFFD4@vl.videotron.ca...  > Russell Wallace wrote:C > > criticism of mergers shouldn't be taken to mean it's a bad idea  for D > > e.g. Boeing to buy up another company, _if that other company is in > > the same business_.  > > B > > (Which Sun and Sony, to go back to the original point, aren't. They're  > > nowhere near even close.)  > F > Boeing buying McDonaldDouglas was just the same as HP buying Compaq:	 you buy a > > competitor to eliminate the competitor. Boeing is stuck with
 facilities it C > doesn't really need but must politically keep opened.  Buying MCD  gave Boeing E > an even greater presence in mlitary. Buying Rockewell gave Boeing a  big F > presence in Military and Space/Satellites. (Hey, the shuttle ios now a Boeing product).  D It's only the military side of the business that's keeping Boeing inF relatively good shape right now. Military and commercial spending tend to be countercyclical.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 00:03:19 -0500 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> D Subject: RE: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun MicrosystemsT Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF402660D7A@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Arne,   @ >>> True. But IBM customers are usually among the more loyal.<<<   Do you mean like Dell?  2 http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,886439,00.aspJ "Dell Computer Corp. has ended a seven-year, $16 billion contract to buy =C hardware components from IBM, and is cutting back on a $6 billion =  services deal.=20   H The deals, struck in 1999, called for Dell to buy everything from disk =J drives and chips to flat-panel monitors. But over the past year, IBM has =D sold off several of the businesses that made these components. For =F example, the Armonk, N.Y., company last summer announced that it was =H selling off its hard-drive business to Hitachi Ltd. of Tokyo for $2.05 =	 billion."    Sorry, could not resist ..   :-)   D Course, even the AIX folks might start to wonder after this IBM VP =	 comments: < http://news.com.com/2100-1001-982512.html?tag=3Dfd_lede2_hedE "January 29, 2003, NEW YORK--The day is approaching when Linux will = B likely replace IBM's version of Unix, the company's top software =C executive said, an indication that the upstart operating system's = $ stature is rising within Big Blue. "  G While IBM doesn't expect Linux to replace its own AIX version of Unix = C any time soon, Big Blue is pushing the open-source OS in the that = H direction, Steve Mills, senior vice president of IBM's Software Group, =: told CNET News.com at last week's LinuxWorld trade show. "   Interesting times ..   Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co.! Consulting & Integration Services  Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: kerryDOTmain@hpDOTcom-     (remove the DOT's and replace with "."'s)  OpenVMS DCL - the original .COM      -----Original Message-----/ From: Arne Vajh=F8j [mailto:arne@vajhoej.dk]=20  Sent: February 15, 2003 5:27 AM  To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com D Subject: Re: How to Avoid the Almost Certain End of Sun Microsystems     Rob Young wrote:B > 	Interestingly enough, perhaps the same analysis applies to AIX.  9 True. But IBM customers are usually among the more loyal.    Arne   ------------------------------   Date: 15 Feb 03 18:39:49 +0100) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) ( Subject: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS) Message-ID: <KSUDXArQSbPd@elias.decus.ch>   < CeBIT trade show (Hanover, Germany  - March 12th-19th 2003)    The hp invite mentions OpenVMS!   F Representatives from HP's Alpha Server Division will be available and  demonstrate the following:  E *	The newly announced Next Generation Alpha Servers, GS1280-Model 16  M clustered with a ES47 system running OpenVMS and running SAP on a TRU64 Unix   cluster within the same box I *	Software demos showing Oracle and industry solutions for Manufacturing   using BASEstar  C *	OpenVMS running on an Intel Itanium. system as a technology demo  * *	Mass Storage devices such as the MSA1000  O Stop by and meet with us. We look forward to showing you HP's new products and  - discussing our latest software partner plans.    ... : For more information about CeBIT, see http://www.cebit.de    ...   A Yet again I see evidence that the European parts of DEC/Compaq/hp A are willing to mention VMS. Can someone tell me why the US/UK lot  don't do that?   --  
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 12:04:04 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> , Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS' Message-ID: <3E4E8114.FE6D8E1D@fsi.net>    Paul Sture wrote:  > = > CeBIT trade show (Hanover, Germany  - March 12th-19th 2003)  > ! > The hp invite mentions OpenVMS!  > G > Representatives from HP's Alpha Server Division will be available and  > demonstrate the following: > L > *       The newly announced Next Generation Alpha Servers, GS1280-Model 16N > clustered with a ES47 system running OpenVMS and running SAP on a TRU64 Unix > cluster within the same box P > *       Software demos showing Oracle and industry solutions for Manufacturing > using BASEstarJ > *       OpenVMS running on an Intel Itanium. system as a technology demo2 > *       Mass Storage devices such as the MSA1000 > P > Stop by and meet with us. We look forward to showing you HP's new products and/ > discussing our latest software partner plans.  >  > ... ; > For more information about CeBIT, see http://www.cebit.de  >  > ...  > C > Yet again I see evidence that the European parts of DEC/Compaq/hp C > are willing to mention VMS. Can someone tell me why the US/UK lot  > don't do that?  = Perhaps the EU hasn't yet developed a troupe of MiBs or black  helicopters...  D ...or perhaps the EU understands something that remains beyond theirH U.S. counterparts: how to successfully market and grow a product, and/orF how to exploit a highly marketable product for maximum profit and long term cash flow.   G ...or perhaps they've not (yet) been assimilated. BG doesn't (yet) rule . the (software) world (he just thinks he does).   --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 20:14:10 -00004 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>, Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS5 Message-ID: <20030215201410.5420.qmail@gacracker.org>   G On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote:  >Paul Sture wrote: >>  > >> CeBIT trade show (Hanover, Germany  - March 12th-19th 2003) >>  " >> The hp invite mentions OpenVMS! >>  H >> Representatives from HP's Alpha Server Division will be available and >> demonstrate the following:  >>  M >> *       The newly announced Next Generation Alpha Servers, GS1280-Model 16 O >> clustered with a ES47 system running OpenVMS and running SAP on a TRU64 Unix  >> cluster within the same boxC >> *       Software demos showing Oracle and industry solutions for  >> Manufacturing >> using BASEstar K >> *       OpenVMS running on an Intel Itanium. system as a technology demo 3 >> *       Mass Storage devices such as the MSA1000  >>  D >> Stop by and meet with us. We look forward to showing you HP's new >> products and 0 >> discussing our latest software partner plans. >>   >> ...< >> For more information about CeBIT, see http://www.cebit.de >>   >> ... >>  D >> Yet again I see evidence that the European parts of DEC/Compaq/hpD >> are willing to mention VMS. Can someone tell me why the US/UK lot >> don't do that?  > > >Perhaps the EU hasn't yet developed a troupe of MiBs or black >helicopters...   ( Loads of black helicopters round here...    < ..NATO HQ in Evere, Brussels is about 10km down the road. ;)     Doc. --  : Time and money, the psychotropics of the business world...K ~ VAXman                                             https://vmsbox.cjb.net    ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 13:14:15 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) , Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS3 Message-ID: <WGeil8TaglKB@eisner.encompasserve.org>   U In article <KSUDXArQSbPd@elias.decus.ch>, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) writes:   C > Yet again I see evidence that the European parts of DEC/Compaq/hp C > are willing to mention VMS. Can someone tell me why the US/UK lot  > don't do that?  C Do you have direct knowledge of US HP actions, or are you swayed by A the fact that the US leads the world in production of comp.os.vms  naysayers ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 20:31:05 +0100 B From: Michiel Erens <I.dont.want.spam@this.mailaddress.is.invalid>, Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS7 Message-ID: <3E4E9579.3E19@this.mailaddress.is.invalid>    Paul Sture wrote:  > = > CeBIT trade show (Hanover, Germany  - March 12th-19th 2003)  > ! > The hp invite mentions OpenVMS!  > 	 >  [snip]  >   > The news of the port to Itanium was on the frontpage of Dutch ; weekly Computable. For those who want to see it, a scan is  B at http://home.wanadoo.nl/erens/openvms/computable01.jpg (135 kb). The article itself is at :  7 http://www.computable.nl/artikels/archief3/d07jb3lx.htm    --   ME Posted by news://news.nb.nu    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 19:46:16 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> , Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMSJ Message-ID: <cOw3a.360795$pDv.299298@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  6 "Paul Sture" <p_sture@elias.decus.ch> wrote in message# news:KSUDXArQSbPd@elias.decus.ch... = > CeBIT trade show (Hanover, Germany  - March 12th-19th 2003)  > ! > The hp invite mentions OpenVMS!  > C > Representatives from HP's Alpha Server Division will be available  and  > demonstrate the following: > F > * The newly announced Next Generation Alpha Servers, GS1280-Model 16C > clustered with a ES47 system running OpenVMS and running SAP on a 
 TRU64 Unix > cluster within the same box < > * Software demos showing Oracle and industry solutions for
 Manufacturing  > using BASEstarD > * OpenVMS running on an Intel Itanium. system as a technology demo, > * Mass Storage devices such as the MSA1000 > C > Stop by and meet with us. We look forward to showing you HP's new  products and/ > discussing our latest software partner plans.  >  > ... ; > For more information about CeBIT, see http://www.cebit.de  >  > ...  > C > Yet again I see evidence that the European parts of DEC/Compaq/hp C > are willing to mention VMS. Can someone tell me why the US/UK lot  > don't do that?    B Europe marches to a different drummer. They tend to have a greater7 understanding of the long-term implications of actions.   E Americans tend to think tactically - quarter-to-quarter, because Wall D Street punishes them if they don't. Also, compensation in the USA isD more closely tied to quarterly earnings rather than long-term wealth	 creation.   2 Not to say that Europeans don't make mistakes too.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 14:11:08 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> , Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS& Message-ID: <3E4E9EDC.3020300@fsi.net>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:  Q  > In article <KSUDXArQSbPd@elias.decus.ch>, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)   writes:   >  >D  >>Yet again I see evidence that the European parts of DEC/Compaq/hpD  >>are willing to mention VMS. Can someone tell me why the US/UK lot  >>don't do that?   >>   >F  > Do you have direct knowledge of US HP actions, or are you swayed byD  > the fact that the US leads the world in production of comp.os.vms  > naysayers ?  >  M Anyone who has (failed to) see the constant bombardment of the media with ads N for OpenVMS, the ubiquitous mention of OpenVMS on the HP and Interex websites,M shrink-wrapped OpenVMS o.s and layered product media packages on the computer J store shelves, (...insert your favorite other examples here...) has direct knowledge of US HP actions.   P That is, the entire U.S. computer consuming public has direct knowledge of US HP (lack of) actions.  N As always, feel free to prove me wrong: cite a publication name, date and pageN number where an OpenVMS ad has appeared in the last six calendar months and/orJ the call sign and city of any TV or radio station known to have carried anO OpenVMS ad anytime in the last six calendar months, the store name and location P where OpenVMS o.s. and/or layered product media kits were seen on the shelf, ...   --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 22:56:03 GMT 1 From: Michael Austin <maustin@firstdbasource.com> , Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS2 Message-ID: <3E4EC1AC.4EFDEE67@firstdbasource.com>   "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > 
 <snippage>   > P > As always, feel free to prove me wrong: cite a publication name, date and pageP > number where an OpenVMS ad has appeared in the last six calendar months and/orL > the call sign and city of any TV or radio station known to have carried anQ > OpenVMS ad anytime in the last six calendar months, the store name and location R > where OpenVMS o.s. and/or layered product media kits were seen on the shelf, ...  E But, then again, I don't see {or hear} of the following OSes on those  same shelves.   A HP-UX, NSK, Solaris, OS390, SGI, Dynix, --- shall I keep going...   D You are comparing apples and chocolates and this, In my mind, is not! even close to a valid comparison. > 		<or insert some other outrageous comparision as you see fit>   >  > -- > David J. Dachtera  > dba DJE Systems  > http://www.djesys.com/ > * > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page:! > http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/      --   Regards,  6 Michael Austin            OpenVMS User since June 1984   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 17:27:21 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> , Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS' Message-ID: <3E4ECCD9.B7AADE22@fsi.net>    Michael Austin wrote:  >  > "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > >  > <snippage> >  > > R > > As always, feel free to prove me wrong: cite a publication name, date and pageR > > number where an OpenVMS ad has appeared in the last six calendar months and/orN > > the call sign and city of any TV or radio station known to have carried anS > > OpenVMS ad anytime in the last six calendar months, the store name and location T > > where OpenVMS o.s. and/or layered product media kits were seen on the shelf, ... > G > But, then again, I don't see {or hear} of the following OSes on those  > same shelves. C > HP-UX, NSK, Solaris, OS390, SGI, Dynix, --- shall I keep going...  > F > You are comparing apples and chocolates and this, In my mind, is not# > even close to a valid comparison. N >                 <or insert some other outrageous comparision as you see fit>  E Try again. At least those o.s.-es *DO* see some exposure in the media  from time to time.    D Now, about those OpenVMS ads... You saw one in this month's issue of( which trade rag? ...on which TV station?   --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 17:31:56 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) , Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS3 Message-ID: <28X$l9+dm1Gj@eisner.encompasserve.org>   [ In article <3E4ECCD9.B7AADE22@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:k > Michael Austin wrote:   H >> But, then again, I don't see {or hear} of the following OSes on those >> same shelves.D >> HP-UX, NSK, Solaris, OS390, SGI, Dynix, --- shall I keep going... >> AG >> You are comparing apples and chocolates and this, In my mind, is notm$ >> even close to a valid comparison.O >>                 <or insert some other outrageous comparision as you see fit>e > G > Try again. At least those o.s.-es *DO* see some exposure in the media  > from time to time.   > F > Now, about those OpenVMS ads... You saw one in this month's issue of* > which trade rag? ...on which TV station?  = Let's see, those other operating systems get "some exposure", 4 which means that for VMS you demand advertisements ?  F Mass media advertising is not the mechanism by which operating systems	 are sold.m   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 18:37:27 -0600m1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> , Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS' Message-ID: <3E4EDD47.9682BD79@fsi.net>a   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > ] > In article <3E4ECCD9.B7AADE22@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:e > > Michael Austin wrote:m > J > >> But, then again, I don't see {or hear} of the following OSes on those > >> same shelves.F > >> HP-UX, NSK, Solaris, OS390, SGI, Dynix, --- shall I keep going... > >>I > >> You are comparing apples and chocolates and this, In my mind, is not & > >> even close to a valid comparison.Q > >>                 <or insert some other outrageous comparision as you see fit>r > >.I > > Try again. At least those o.s.-es *DO* see some exposure in the mediaj > > from time to time. > > H > > Now, about those OpenVMS ads... You saw one in this month's issue of, > > which trade rag? ...on which TV station? > ? > Let's see, those other operating systems get "some exposure",s6 > which means that for VMS you demand advertisements ? > H > Mass media advertising is not the mechanism by which operating systems > are sold.s  + SSSHHHH!!!! Don't tell Micro$lop, Sun, etc.t   -- e David J. DachteraB dba DJE Systemss http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/j   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 01:09:56 GMTe# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> , Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMSH Message-ID: <ExB3a.58655$Qf1.58418@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  : "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message- news:28X$l9+dm1Gj@eisner.encompasserve.org...y= > In article <3E4ECCD9.B7AADE22@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera"B <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:  > > Michael Austin wrote:n >lD > >> But, then again, I don't see {or hear} of the following OSes on thoses > >> same shelves.F > >> HP-UX, NSK, Solaris, OS390, SGI, Dynix, --- shall I keep going... > >>E > >> You are comparing apples and chocolates and this, In my mind, isB nots& > >> even close to a valid comparison.D > >>                 <or insert some other outrageous comparision as you see fit> > >oC > > Try again. At least those o.s.-es *DO* see some exposure in the  mediay > > from time to time. > >rE > > Now, about those OpenVMS ads... You saw one in this month's issuem of, > > which trade rag? ...on which TV station? >&? > Let's see, those other operating systems get "some exposure",36 > which means that for VMS you demand advertisements ? >s@ > Mass media advertising is not the mechanism by which operating systemss > are sold.e     Larry,  . Maybe not 'sold', but certainly made aware of.  C You must be having a 'senior' moment, for you seem to be forgettingfF all the recent IBM ads for Linux servers, and in recent years past forE Solaris as in "The Dot in Dot Com", and the 'Network is the Computer'A@ campaign. Oh yes...and some crap ads in all media forms known to4 mankind for some crap from a company in Redmond, WA.   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Feb 03 04:25:43 +0100) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)I, Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS) Message-ID: <DylxdmoEsqSl@elias.decus.ch>   c In article <WGeil8TaglKB@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:fW > In article <KSUDXArQSbPd@elias.decus.ch>, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) writes:- > D >> Yet again I see evidence that the European parts of DEC/Compaq/hpD >> are willing to mention VMS. Can someone tell me why the US/UK lot >> don't do that?3 > E > Do you have direct knowledge of US HP actions, or are you swayed bysC > the fact that the US leads the world in production of comp.os.vms.
 > naysayers ?n   Yes and no, in that order.  I I cannot disagree with the inference of the latter half of your sentence, B although a one man band from Canada is giving your nation  serious competition there...   -- a
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 22:16:41 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)C, Subject: Re: hp invite to CeBIT mentions VMS3 Message-ID: <w0KVmdHm3wXK@eisner.encompasserve.org>i  U In article <DylxdmoEsqSl@elias.decus.ch>, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) writes:ue > In article <WGeil8TaglKB@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:r  D >> the fact that the US leads the world in production of comp.os.vms >> naysayers ?  K > I cannot disagree with the inference of the latter half of your sentence,uD > although a one man band from Canada is giving your nation  serious > competition there...  G I apologize for my inaccuracy, failing to take into account differences@ in killfile settings.(   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 23:15:29 -0500o  From: John Santos <JOHN@egh.com> Subject: RE: HSZ50 Battery Qs44 Message-ID: <1030215230737.943A-100000@Ives.egh.com>  ' On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Shane Smith wrote:m  I > In a heart transplant operation, a heart/lung machine is hooked up as awG > bypass to keep the patient's blood moving while the heart is missing.uF > Maybe something similar could be done with an external battery and aI > couple of leads clipped to the board - keep the current going while theiI > battery is swapped. Admittedly having two batteries in parallel brieflyiJ > would run too much juice through the kit, which might cause some damage,2 > but you might get away with it if you move fast. > J > Anyone with better electronics knowledge than me (not difficult) care toG > comment? Preferably before someone tries it and something explodes if  > I'm wrong... >   C No, batteries are voltage sources, not current sources.  It doesn't*F matter at all if you have 1 or 100 batteries in parallel[*].  Assuming? you don't screw up by shorting something, reversing the batterye? polarity, or using a battery of sufficiently different voltage,	( hot-swapping like this should work fine.    ; [*] Unless you are drawing enough current that the internal A resistance of the battery is significant compared to the external ? resistance, which causes the external voltage of the battery too< drop and ultimately limits the current that can be supplied.< For this circumstance to apply, the battery would have to be@ almost shorted out (extremely low resistance through the board),: which is certainly not the case with a battery designed to  supply weeks or months of power.   > Shaner > , > On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Mark D. Jilson wrote: > I > > I know that it sounds very unfair but I don't make the rules.  An HSZ J > > owner that needs the serial number reset for ANY reason has to pay $$$I > > either via a service contract or on a per-call basis.  The details onwL > > how this is done are company confidential and it would be a disciplinaryK > > offense for an employee to tell you or to do the work without followingC > > procedure. > >  > > Manser wrote:w > > > But i have one question: > > > I > > > what happens when that Battery goes flat ? and what i to do in thato > > > situation ?iA > > > about the secret way to get the serial number back, i stille > > > interested.  > > >  > > > Nazim Manser.a > >  > >  >  >    -- I John Santosr Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 11:19:15 -0800! From: gokrix@hotmail.com (gokrix)PV Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"= Message-ID: <50e71495.0302151119.4654c600@posting.google.com>o  f young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) wrote in message news:<Fo0fuWu1uvrR@eisner.encompasserve.org>...@ > In article <OoKcnV7QOYxI_dGjXTWc2Q@metrocast.net>, "Bill Todd" > <billtodd@metrocad > st.net> writes:i > > < > > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message >  = > > L > > Since, of course, POWER4+ processors *already* out-perform Itanic2s (andP > > even POWER4 was at no net performance disadvantage), the above clarifies theP > > fact (which regular readers of L'Inq should already know) that Egan Orion isK > > not exactly an expert on the relative merits of the two platforms:  his=M > > primary interest is Linux, hence his comments fail to address some of thea9 > > more significant aspects of the article he refers to.h > > O > > In particular, not only is IBM now apparently comfortable making statementsgP > > that marginalize Itanic, but industry analysts seem comfortable going along: > >  > > <quote>  > > P > > Illuminata's Haff agreed that the Itanium chip has proved to be a formidableM > > competitor to Power and Sun Microsystems' UltraSPARC processors but addedn; > > that he senses the industry cooling on Itanium overall.a > > P > > "I think the industry is starting to shift a bit around Itanium," Haff said.O > > "Two years ago people looked at Itanium and thought it would be the naturalaO > > order of things to have Intel as the 64-bit chip supplier. The fact is that L > > Itanium is still basically an HPCC [high-performance computing clusters]N > > play, so IBM is looking to go their own route if they can get just as much > > market share with Power."a > >  > > </quote> > > N > > Gordon Haff is not exactly an anti-Itanic fanatic, by the way:  he was theN > > author of the highly complimentary article about HP's McKinley zx1 chipset > > last year. > > P > > There might be a parallel with political campaigns, where lots of early hypeN > > results in a candidate 'peaking' too early and losing public interest (or,P > > worse yet, being caught out on statements made sufficiently early that thereP > > was time to prove them false) before the actual election occurs.  The ItanicM > > juggernaut has been enough of a sluggernaut (both in appearance and in atnN > > least initial performance) that it may be starting to face a sea change inN > > the perception of its aura of invincibility before there's really anything! > > actually invincible about it.  > >  > >  > M >         All good.  But the battle really hasn't even begun yet.  Give Intel F >         2 or 3 more rounds of Itanium to turn the tables.  Here is a! >         hint of things to come:i > 5 > http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2003/0107sgirelea.htmli > M > The entry-level Altix 3300 server starts at US$70,176 in the U.S. with foure& > processors and 32G bytes of memory.  > ! >         That is a sweet spot.  : > O >         Now we can dig about and have a good pissy back and forth on pricing.i > O >         Here is IBM, one of their latest, we see that they list 64 GBytes of  , >         RAM for a high-end box at $241000: > E > http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_result_detail.asp?id=102122701  > G >         From that same listing, an 8-way MCM at $275000.  That's not  A >         a reasonable comparison?  Okay, how about an 8-way box:w > I > http://www.tpc.org/results/individual_results/IBM/IBM6m1es_02012002.pdf$ >  >         AIX - p660I >         8way (2 4ways) listing for $74000, 64 GBytes of RAM at $229000.iI >         Much better on the CPU prices, but memory is very badly priced.o > D >         Back to Itanium, Unisys 16 processor Itanium, 32 GBytes of >         memory at $43880:m > K > http://www.tpc.org/results/individual_results/Unisys/ES7000_021029_ES.pdft > H >         So what is SGI actually charging per CPU for those Itaniums inH >         their 4 processor box?  Well... it is a bundle, but they can'tG >         be charging more than $8000 to come in at $70000 including 32 J >         GBytes memory.  SGI's Altix with 64 CPUs lists for $1.2 million,H >         with 0 memory that works out to $20000 per CPU.  Far less thanI >         IBM's high-end CPU pricing  (8-ways for $275000 - see above andp? > 	note too that was a very recent TPC listing, not dredging up: > 	old info here). >  >         From the Inquirer: > * > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=7454 > ' >             $1300    $2250      $4226s( > Merced     733/2M    733/4M     800/4M( > McKinley   900/1.5M 1000/1.5M  1000/3M( > Madison   1300/3M   1400/4M    1400/6M > : >         Allowing OEMs to put together nice priced boxes. > I >         Itanium servers at 1/2 list price of IBM's servers will make a aH >         difference (counting memory of course).  It won't matter that  >         Power is 20% faster. > H >         Now I grant you this, IBM slashes prices 50% across the board,F >         it will make the battle more interesting.  Probably irritateL >         a whole bunch of customers that paid those inflated server prices.J >         There is an analogy here.  There were folks paying a WHOLE bunchH >         of money for "Enterprise" storage a few years ago.  Pricing inG >         that space came down as we know and yes, their customers wereRP >         not happy that they had recently paid inflated prices for "Enterprise" >         storage. > K >         We'll see if IBM will enjoy making a whole lot less money on AIX mF >         hardware.  I don't see it happening, after all ... they have0 > 	to pay for that POWER R&D infrastructure ;-).  B All very interesting.  And Intel doesn't have to pay for the R&D? @ What do you think will be the break-even numbers for the ItaniumE (family)?  How many of these $4300 chips do you think they'll have tog push to turn a profit?  E Those billions invested over 10-12 years, they ain't easy to recover,e with prices like these....  0 And don't tell me they're moving to the desktop.  ? If you think the game is over, you're grossly mistaken.  It's a.1 question of which of these can outlast the other.y     Regards, --GS   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 14:11:55 -0600t1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>-V Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"& Message-ID: <3E4E9F0B.5030000@fsi.net>   Rob Young wrote:  	  > [snip]uN  >         All good.  But the battle really hasn't even begun yet.  Give Intel  >         2 or 3c     or 10 to 20 or 100 or ...e  -  > more rounds of Itanium to turn the tables.b  - How much is enough for the love of spit???!!!i    N How long would YOU last on *YOUR* job if you told your boss, "Yeah, I know ourN team's been trying to get this right for the last ten years or more. Just giveN us another two or three whacks at it and I think we can knock this baby out inO grand style! I know another team got right ten or twelve years ago and has beenlO inproving on it ever since, but their funding just got cut for getting it rightrP but costing too much in the process. Sure, we've made misteakes, but we're stillP learning! Everyone knows that's a cost-effective investment! Relax! The world is round! We'll get there!"   *MAJOR* Reality Check!   --   David J. Dachterae dba DJE Systemsm http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/a   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 21:14:13 GMTdL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")V Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"6 Message-ID: <00A1B87C.99284AD5@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  Z In article <3E4EA6CC.2010203@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes: >John Smith wrote: >.) >Que es "Q.E.D."? (In Angles, por favor.)e  G Which is hard, because it's an abbreviation for a Latin phrase - memory K suggests "quod erat demonstratum".  It just means "It is demonstrated", or  / in other words, "I have proved my proposition."C   -- Alan   t  O ===============================================================================s0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056oM  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025 O ===============================================================================e   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 20:05:00 GMTD# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> V Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"J Message-ID: <M3x3a.360891$pDv.319974@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  . "gokrix" <gokrix@hotmail.com> wrote in message7 news:50e71495.0302151119.4654c600@posting.google.com...r8 > young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) wrote in message/ news:<Fo0fuWu1uvrR@eisner.encompasserve.org>...aB > > In article <OoKcnV7QOYxI_dGjXTWc2Q@metrocast.net>, "Bill Todd" > > <billtodd@metrocai > > st.net> writes:n > >uC > >         All good.  But the battle really hasn't even begun yet. 
 Give IntelF > >         2 or 3 more rounds of Itanium to turn the tables.  Here is aa# > >         hint of things to come:u > >i7 > > http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2003/0107sgirelea.html  > >eE > > The entry-level Altix 3300 server starts at US$70,176 in the U.S.l	 with fouro' > > processors and 32G bytes of memory.i > > ! > >         That is a sweet spot.  > > E > >         Now we can dig about and have a good pissy back and forthm on pricing.R > >wF > >         Here is IBM, one of their latest, we see that they list 64	 GBytes ofA. > >         RAM for a high-end box at $241000: > >> > >rC http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_result_detail.asp?id=102122701< > > D > >         From that same listing, an 8-way MCM at $275000.  That's notpC > >         a reasonable comparison?  Okay, how about an 8-way box:o > >= > >dF http://www.tpc.org/results/individual_results/IBM/IBM6m1es_02012002.pd fd > >2 > >         AIX - p660B > >         8way (2 4ways) listing for $74000, 64 GBytes of RAM at $229000.C > >         Much better on the CPU prices, but memory is very badlyl priced.u > >sF > >         Back to Itanium, Unisys 16 processor Itanium, 32 GBytes of > >         memory at $43880:w > >  > >nF http://www.tpc.org/results/individual_results/Unisys/ES7000_021029_ES. pdf  > >o> > >         So what is SGI actually charging per CPU for those Itaniums in D > >         their 4 processor box?  Well... it is a bundle, but they can'thF > >         be charging more than $8000 to come in at $70000 including 32C > >         GBytes memory.  SGI's Altix with 64 CPUs lists for $1.2' million,E > >         with 0 memory that works out to $20000 per CPU.  Far less' thanA > >         IBM's high-end CPU pricing  (8-ways for $275000 - seen	 above andc@ > > note too that was a very recent TPC listing, not dredging up > > old info here).  > >e > >         From the Inquirer: > >i, > > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=7454 > >C) > >             $1300    $2250      $4226e* > > Merced     733/2M    733/4M     800/4M* > > McKinley   900/1.5M 1000/1.5M  1000/3M* > > Madison   1300/3M   1400/4M    1400/6M > >r< > >         Allowing OEMs to put together nice priced boxes. > >mC > >         Itanium servers at 1/2 list price of IBM's servers will  make aD > >         difference (counting memory of course).  It won't matter that  > >         Power is 20% faster. > >1C > >         Now I grant you this, IBM slashes prices 50% across thei board,? > >         it will make the battle more interesting.  Probablyt irritateF > >         a whole bunch of customers that paid those inflated server prices. F > >         There is an analogy here.  There were folks paying a WHOLE bunche> > >         of money for "Enterprise" storage a few years ago.
 Pricing inD > >         that space came down as we know and yes, their customers wereE > >         not happy that they had recently paid inflated prices for  "Enterprise" > >         storage. > >sE > >         We'll see if IBM will enjoy making a whole lot less moneys on AIXC > >         hardware.  I don't see it happening, after all ... theyG have1 > > to pay for that POWER R&D infrastructure ;-).e >SC > All very interesting.  And Intel doesn't have to pay for the R&D?oB > What do you think will be the break-even numbers for the ItaniumD > (family)?  How many of these $4300 chips do you think they'll have to > push to turn a profit? >a> > Those billions invested over 10-12 years, they ain't easy to recover, > with prices like these.... >s2 > And don't tell me they're moving to the desktop. > A > If you think the game is over, you're grossly mistaken.  It's a 3 > question of which of these can outlast the other.p >s  E Okay, let's dissect that a bit. According to FASB (which rule # slipshE my mind at the present time), the R&D costs are expensed as incurred.-? That means that over the past 10 years while Intel/HP have beend? spending their money, they have each been charging the R&D cost F against the balance sheet each year in an amount equal to their annualE expenditures. This lowers earning each year. This money is spent, and  expensed, and gone.i  C Once the project reached the stage where it was/is no longer an R&DDF effort [we can argue that it still is ;-) ], the expenditures involvedC in setting up the fab for it and the certain other other ancilliary6D costs become what are known as capital items and now must be carriedF on the balance sheet, with a regulated percentage depreciated (written? off) each year. The amount written off each year depends on theEC specific asset class. The actual cost of fabrication of wafers (rawnC materials, wages, production tinkering, broken wafers, electricity,  water, etc...) is expensed.l  D I have not followed the capital expenditures incurred for productionC of Itanic so I cannot comment on their magnitude, nor if the FAB isCC shared with other production.  At present, Intel is probably reallyd@ only concerned about the actual costs of production, and I would7 guarantee that it is far less than the figure you cite.'  A That said, they still want to make a buck on it. So if the volume ? isn't there, they will pull a Compaq/HP chip decision and ceaseiE production pretty fast, and HP will have to take it on the chin. MuchrC as I'd like AMD to survive, I don't think it's going to happen. If,oA as, and when, AMD goes down, HP will be stuck with whatever Intel E decides they want to sell and at whatever price Intel chooses to sellrD it at. HP will become just another Packard Bell, selling white label boxes produced by Intel.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 20:23:31 GMTo# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>-V Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"J Message-ID: <7lx3a.360969$pDv.105050@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message  news:3E4E9F0B.5030000@fsi.net... > Rob Young wrote: >t >  > [snip]>D >  >         All good.  But the battle really hasn't even begun yet.
 Give Intel >  >         2 or 3n >! >> > or 10 to 20 or 100 or ...P >A/ >  > more rounds of Itanium to turn the tables.m >t/ > How much is enough for the love of spit???!!!a >u >dE > How long would YOU last on *YOUR* job if you told your boss, "Yeah,S
 I know ourF > team's been trying to get this right for the last ten years or more.	 Just give*D > us another two or three whacks at it and I think we can knock this baby out in D > grand style! I know another team got right ten or twelve years ago and has been@ > inproving on it ever since, but their funding just got cut for getting it rightF > but costing too much in the process. Sure, we've made misteakes, but we're stilluE > learning! Everyone knows that's a cost-effective investment! Relax!o The world is > round! We'll get there!"     David,  E The other team didn't get its chip 'whacked' because it cost too muchmB in the process. The chip got the kiss on the lips and then whackedD because the marketing borons and guys in the shiny suits and coiffedE hair-do's didn't get their sh*t together to SELL the product with anye- conviction or consistency to *new* customers.e  @ VMS still has (and Tru64 had) an incredible value proposition toF mission-critical customers. It still isn't being effectively sold evenB though HP "says" that VMS is going to be around for a long time. I@ think that for HP "be around for a long time" means that it willE continue to linger like the smell like a rotting corpse in a field inoC Alabama in the summertime. It can't be gotten rid of fast enough tot: suit them. If they meant otherwise, they'd have long since6 demonstrated that by advertising and marketing. Q.E.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 17:01:32 -0500e* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>V Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"2 Message-ID: <RN2cne4njaFZJdOjXTWcpQ@metrocast.net>  H ""Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"" <winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>A wrote in message news:00A1B87C.99284AD5@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU...a< > In article <3E4EA6CC.2010203@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:i > >John Smith wrote: > > + > >Que es "Q.E.D."? (In Angles, por favor.)( >oI > Which is hard, because it's an abbreviation for a Latin phrase - memoryS$ > suggests "quod erat demonstratum".  J Close:  "Quod erat demonstrandum".  *My* sometimes-dubious memory suggestsH that the last is a gerund (rather than a participle), but I wouldn't bet money on it...   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 17:04:11 -05003* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>V Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"2 Message-ID: <VKadnUNztZf-JNOjXTWc3w@metrocast.net>  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageD news:7lx3a.360969$pDv.105050@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...   ...t  : >HP "says" that VMS is going to be around for a long time.  L That reminds me:  I meant to ask why the VMS roadmap seemed to kind of reachI a dead end about two years (+/-) from now, despite an assertion I seem to G remember that HP published rolling 5-year roadmaps.  Struck me as a bit ( ominous:  has it been extended recently?   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 14:45:00 -0600n1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>mV Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"& Message-ID: <3E4EA6CC.2010203@fsi.net>   John Smith wrote:e  > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message" > news:3E4E9F0B.5030000@fsi.net... >  >>Rob Young wrote: >> >> > [snip] D >> >         All good.  But the battle really hasn't even begun yet. >> > Give Intel >  >> >         2 or 3e >> >> >>or 10 to 20 or 100 or ...  >>/ >> > more rounds of Itanium to turn the tables.o >>/ >>How much is enough for the love of spit???!!!o >> >>E >>How long would YOU last on *YOUR* job if you told your boss, "Yeah,f >> > I know our > F >>team's been trying to get this right for the last ten years or more. >> > Just given > D >>us another two or three whacks at it and I think we can knock this >>
 > baby out ind > D >>grand style! I know another team got right ten or twelve years ago >> > and has been > @ >>inproving on it ever since, but their funding just got cut for >> > getting it right > F >>but costing too much in the process. Sure, we've made misteakes, but >>
 > we're stilly > E >>learning! Everyone knows that's a cost-effective investment! Relax!D >> > The world is >  >>round! We'll get there!" >> >  >  > David, > G > The other team didn't get its chip 'whacked' because it cost too much D > in the process. The chip got the kiss on the lips and then whackedF > because the marketing borons and guys in the shiny suits and coiffedG > hair-do's didn't get their sh*t together to SELL the product with any / > conviction or consistency to *new* customers.t > B > VMS still has (and Tru64 had) an incredible value proposition toH > mission-critical customers. It still isn't being effectively sold evenD > though HP "says" that VMS is going to be around for a long time. IB > think that for HP "be around for a long time" means that it willG > continue to linger like the smell like a rotting corpse in a field intE > Alabama in the summertime. It can't be gotten rid of fast enough toi< > suit them. If they meant otherwise, they'd have long since8 > demonstrated that by advertising and marketing. Q.E.D.  ( Que es "Q.E.D."? (In Angles, por favor.)     -- a David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systemsp http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 01:22:05 GMTh# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>nV Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"H Message-ID: <1JB3a.58735$Qf1.47243@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message  news:3E4EA6CC.2010203@fsi.net... > John Smith wrote:: >0@ > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message$ > > news:3E4E9F0B.5030000@fsi.net... > >s > >>Rob Young wrote: > >>
 > >> > [snip]oF > >> >         All good.  But the battle really hasn't even begun yet. > >> > > Give Intel > >i > >> >         2 or 3d > >> > >> > >>or 10 to 20 or 100 or ...h > >>1 > >> > more rounds of Itanium to turn the tables.  > >>1 > >>How much is enough for the love of spit???!!!v > >> > >>@ > >>How long would YOU last on *YOUR* job if you told your boss, "Yeah, > >> > > I know our > > B > >>team's been trying to get this right for the last ten years or more.t > >>
 > > Just givee > >hF > >>us another two or three whacks at it and I think we can knock this > >> > > baby out in  > >hF > >>grand style! I know another team got right ten or twelve years ago > >> > > and has been > >oB > >>inproving on it ever since, but their funding just got cut for > >> > > getting it right > >-D > >>but costing too much in the process. Sure, we've made misteakes, but  > >> > > we're stillp > > @ > >>learning! Everyone knows that's a cost-effective investment! Relax! > >> > > The world is > >  > >>round! We'll get there!" > >> > >- > >-
 > > David, > >aD > > The other team didn't get its chip 'whacked' because it cost too muchF > > in the process. The chip got the kiss on the lips and then whacked@ > > because the marketing borons and guys in the shiny suits and coiffed E > > hair-do's didn't get their sh*t together to SELL the product with  anyo1 > > conviction or consistency to *new* customers.b > >eD > > VMS still has (and Tru64 had) an incredible value proposition toE > > mission-critical customers. It still isn't being effectively soldr evenF > > though HP "says" that VMS is going to be around for a long time. ID > > think that for HP "be around for a long time" means that it willF > > continue to linger like the smell like a rotting corpse in a field inD > > Alabama in the summertime. It can't be gotten rid of fast enough to> > > suit them. If they meant otherwise, they'd have long since: > > demonstrated that by advertising and marketing. Q.E.D. >v* > Que es "Q.E.D."? (In Angles, por favor.) > @ I addition to the learned answers already posted, it is commonly7 reduced in English to "Quite Effectively Demonstrated".e   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 01:23:55 GMTo# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>hV Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"G Message-ID: <LKB3a.58747$Qf1.1568@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>w  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message-, news:VKadnUNztZf-JNOjXTWc3w@metrocast.net... >l0 > "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageF > news:7lx3a.360969$pDv.105050@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com... >r > ...  > < > >HP "says" that VMS is going to be around for a long time. >yE > That reminds me:  I meant to ask why the VMS roadmap seemed to kinda of reachC > a dead end about two years (+/-) from now, despite an assertion IH seem to,E > remember that HP published rolling 5-year roadmaps.  Struck me as ae bita* > ominous:  has it been extended recently?    E Why on earth would you think that it had been? If it had been, a saneiE and rational organization would be widely and heavily promoting it toi+ *new* customers. I see no evidence of that.u   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Feb 03 03:55:17 +0100) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)uV Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it") Message-ID: <+zvaPGoYIzEn@elias.decus.ch>t  Z In article <3E4EA6CC.2010203@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:   > * > Que es "Q.E.D."? (In Angles, por favor.) >   M "quod erat demonstrandum". Latin for something like "which was demonstrated".e   Sometimes misused IMHO.c   -- h
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 22:01:18 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)BV Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it"3 Message-ID: <IdjTuHPkaqRS@eisner.encompasserve.org>   a In article <50e71495.0302151119.4654c600@posting.google.com>, gokrix@hotmail.com (gokrix) writes:,] > young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) wrote in message news:<Fo0fuWu1uvrR@eisner.encompassem   >>  L >>         We'll see if IBM will enjoy making a whole lot less money on AIX G >>         hardware.  I don't see it happening, after all ... they haveA1 >> 	to pay for that POWER R&D infrastructure ;-).  > D > All very interesting.  And Intel doesn't have to pay for the R&D?   ; 	Yes.  But the others don't.  Intel has been paying for CPUn1 	R&D and manufacturing for quite a while in fact.e  B > What do you think will be the break-even numbers for the ItaniumG > (family)?  How many of these $4300 chips do you think they'll have to  > push to turn a profit?  ? 	It doesn't matter.  If they lose money on Itanium for the next-> 	5 years until they turn the corner, would be fine.  They have1 	the large money making IA32 products and others./   	Look at their financials:  & http://biz.yahoo.com/fin/l/i/intc.html  , 	They have made sizable money every quarter.   > G > Those billions invested over 10-12 years, they ain't easy to recover,E > with prices like these.... >   8 	Itanium investment isn't even a billion yet.  Read some 	www.realworldtech.com threads.2  2 > And don't tell me they're moving to the desktop.   	Yes it will be quite a while.   > A > If you think the game is over, you're grossly mistaken.  It's ao3 > question of which of these can outlast the other.  >   < 	Yep.  Certainly isn't Sun.  They don't have a money center.A 	HP has printers, IBM has several segments to prop up their money>@ 	losing FABs.  Microsoft has Office to fuel it.  Sun has nothing! 	and their financials reflect it:c  & http://biz.yahoo.com/fin/l/s/sunw.html  ? 	They lost $2.6 billion last year and are expected to lose this  	year.   				Robs   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 19:48:56 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>sY Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" fo&H Message-ID: <IQw3a.360806$pDv.3754@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3E4E7D9A.DC61207E@fsi.net...  > Bob Ceculski wrote:t > > 2 > > "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message5 news:<CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEKKGJAA.tom@kednos.com>... B > > > I think you misread, IBM is spending lots of money on Linux, just not > > > on Itanium.e > > >t > > ; > > should be the other way around ... linux is the scienceo( > > project, and a lousy one at that ... >sF > ...which is interesting: Linux has been running on IA32 since before@ > Emerald was so much as a line of code. Linux is now displacing5 > WhineBloze in some cases, and VMS in others. It's aI multi-billion-dollarA > business world-wide, while Itanic continues to founder, and the  *BSDsaC > are distant runners-up in the race for dollars (but advancing, by  > appearances).  >t > Draw your own conclusions...  ) Not meaning to be picky, but here goes...lD Emerald was a late 80's thing at its genesis. Linus didn't start his work until 1991-92.    I stand to be corrected.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 14:46:19 -0600h1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>wY Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" fo & Message-ID: <3E4EA71B.1070309@fsi.net>   John Smith wrote:e  > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message# > news:3E4E7D9A.DC61207E@fsi.net...t >  >>Bob Ceculski wrote:h >>1 >>>"Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message- >>> 7 > news:<CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEKKGJAA.tom@kednos.com>...o > @ >>>>I think you misread, IBM is spending lots of money on Linux, >>>>
 > just not >  >>>>on Itanium.m >>>> >>>>: >>>should be the other way around ... linux is the science' >>>project, and a lousy one at that ...t >>><F >>...which is interesting: Linux has been running on IA32 since before@ >>Emerald was so much as a line of code. Linux is now displacing5 >>WhineBloze in some cases, and VMS in others. It's as >> > multi-billion-dollar > A >>business world-wide, while Itanic continues to founder, and thed >> > *BSDso > C >>are distant runners-up in the race for dollars (but advancing, byc >>appearances).e >> >>Draw your own conclusions... >> > + > Not meaning to be picky, but here goes...aF > Emerald was a late 80's thing at its genesis. Linus didn't start his > work until 1991-92.e >  > I stand to be corrected.  7 I thought Emerald was spawned in the '486 era. No, huh?S   -- o David J. Dachterat dba DJE Systemst http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/e   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 01:22:01 GMTl# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>pY Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" fonH Message-ID: <ZIB3a.58733$Qf1.29810@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message  news:3E4EA71B.1070309@fsi.net... > John Smith wrote:e >o@ > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message% > > news:3E4E7D9A.DC61207E@fsi.net...n > >l > >>Bob Ceculski wrote:  > >>3 > >>>"Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in messages > >>>o9 > > news:<CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEKKGJAA.tom@kednos.com>...a > >*B > >>>>I think you misread, IBM is spending lots of money on Linux, > >>>> > > just not > >i > >>>>on Itanium.f > >>>> > >>>>< > >>>should be the other way around ... linux is the science) > >>>project, and a lousy one at that ...t > >>>tA > >>...which is interesting: Linux has been running on IA32 sincet beforeB > >>Emerald was so much as a line of code. Linux is now displacing7 > >>WhineBloze in some cases, and VMS in others. It's a. > >> > > multi-billion-dollar > > C > >>business world-wide, while Itanic continues to founder, and thee > >>	 > > *BSDsd > >hE > >>are distant runners-up in the race for dollars (but advancing, byo > >>appearances).  > >>  > >>Draw your own conclusions... > >> > >o- > > Not meaning to be picky, but here goes...fD > > Emerald was a late 80's thing at its genesis. Linus didn't start hisu > > work until 1991-92.  > >o > > I stand to be corrected. >e9 > I thought Emerald was spawned in the '486 era. No, huh?     E I believe that Emerald and Prism were overlapping projects, and thosef were late 80's.o  D http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494F http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=4494&Action=Comme ntsp   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 11:49:14 -0600o1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>nY Subject: Re: IBM says "Itanium is like a science project. There's not a market for it" fo ' Message-ID: <3E4E7D9A.DC61207E@fsi.net>a   Bob Ceculski wrote:e > f > "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message news:<CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEKKGJAA.tom@kednos.com>...I > > I think you misread, IBM is spending lots of money on Linux, just not  > > on Itanium.  > >g > 9 > should be the other way around ... linux is the sciencen& > project, and a lousy one at that ...  D ...which is interesting: Linux has been running on IA32 since before> Emerald was so much as a line of code. Linux is now displacingH WhineBloze in some cases, and VMS in others. It's a multi-billion-dollarE business world-wide, while Itanic continues to founder, and the *BSDscA are distant runners-up in the race for dollars (but advancing, byn
 appearances).c   Draw your own conclusions...   -- e David J. Dachterae dba DJE SystemsL http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 14:43:00 GMTa0 From: rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net (Russell Wallace)- Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5 years ... 0 Message-ID: <3e4e519a.231164039@news.eircom.net>  F On 12 Feb 2003 13:15:03 GMT, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:  B >IBM wasn't even wrong on that.  Originally it was supposed to be C >M68K based.  The decision to go with INTEL was a strictly businessbA >decision knowing full well it was a bad technical decision.  Thes@ >fact that going into this IBM knew the worse (worst?) choice of? >CPU had been made makes it even more of an accomplishment thata( >they made it the success it has become.  C Though in the long run, x86 turned out to be better than 68k; givenaE that those were the only candidates, they chose what turned out to bec the best available CPU.s   -- b3 "Mercy to the guilty is treachery to the innocent."]+ Remove killer rodent from address to reply. ! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallace    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 14:43:27 GMT 0 From: rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net (Russell Wallace)- Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5 years ...n0 Message-ID: <3e4e51f7.231256839@news.eircom.net>  F On 12 Feb 2003 09:38:50 -0600, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:  E >   What I mind is the decision to sub out the software to Billy boy.r   You'd prefer an IBM monopoly?u   --  3 "Mercy to the guilty is treachery to the innocent." + Remove killer rodent from address to reply.a! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallace    ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 12:59:08 -05007 From: pechter@shell.monmouth.com (Bill/Carolyn Pechter)iQ Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyt- Message-ID: <b2lv5c$6kv$1@shell.monmouth.com>   0 In article <3e4e51f7.231256839@news.eircom.net>,1 Russell Wallace <rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net> wrote:eG >On 12 Feb 2003 09:38:50 -0600, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.orga >(Bob Koehler) wrote:n >tF >>   What I mind is the decision to sub out the software to Billy boy. >  >You'd prefer an IBM monopoly? >tC (I crossposted this to alt.folklore.computers -- since this topic'so moving from OpenVMS...)    Yes...  > Having worked for DEC, (and among others Concurrent, Alliant, E and IBM and Lucent...) I'd have to say I'd prefer an IBM monopoly to h one ruled by Microsoft.h  A At least the IBM hardware worked and the software was functional.   C Specs were available to interface with IBM comm protocols.  Patents0@ are available for cross license...  I see nothing wrong with IBM' since '81 when I got into the business.m  F IBM may have been a bitch to compete with -- but they never picked outC smaller companies to buy up to eliminate any competition. They were6G hard tough competitors, but they seemed to be pretty honest compared to0 what I've seen out of Redmond.  G I'd prefer OpenVMS was in IBM's hands since I've got more faith in themnF continuing it then I do HP.  I had first hand experience with Lucent's4 management (or is it mis-management) at Bell Labs...  H I don't think Carly's really a computer person -- and I think that's oneG of the problems with the computer business today -- not "theinformationl technology business."   D IBM seemed to want to be the biggest and strongest computer company.G IBM seemed to want to be the leader and the standard.  I feel MicrosoftrD won't give up until EVERY piece of computing machine (including your2 car and toaster) boots and runs a Windows varient.       Bill   -- 2M +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+dM | Bill and/or Carolyn Pechter    |        pechter@shell.monmouth.com        |wM |   Bill Gates is a Persian cat and a monocle away from being a villain in  | N |   a James Bond movie              -- Dennis Miller                        | M +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+t   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 13:12:13 -05007 From: pechter@shell.monmouth.com (Bill/Carolyn Pechter)eQ Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopoly.- Message-ID: <b2lvtt$79l$1@shell.monmouth.com>e   > From: rhondap@sco.comr" > Subject: List of patches for VMS$ > Submit-To: scoannmod@xenitec.on.ca > Organization: The SCO Groups% > Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 14:00:03 GMTp  I Following my last post I noticed the above in the comp.unix.sco.announce bH newsgroup and damned near freaked on the acronym for Caldera's Volution  Messaging Server.t  ) Geez... if they owned Unix and OpenVMS...sD Might actually get something for my SCO stock then... right now it's: worth as much as my Lucent or almost as much as Sun... 8-(   Bill   -- MM +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+tM | Bill and/or Carolyn Pechter    |        pechter@shell.monmouth.com        |tM |   Bill Gates is a Persian cat and a monocle away from being a villain in  |DN |   a James Bond movie              -- Dennis Miller                        | M +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+o   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 22:32:37 GMTv0 From: rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net (Russell Wallace)Q Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopoly 0 Message-ID: <3e4ebc62.258504087@news.eircom.net>  9 On 15 Feb 2003 12:59:08 -0500, pechter@shell.monmouth.com- (Bill/Carolyn Pechter) wrote:e  E >IBM seemed to want to be the biggest and strongest computer company.-H >IBM seemed to want to be the leader and the standard.  I feel MicrosoftE >won't give up until EVERY piece of computing machine (including yourt3 >car and toaster) boots and runs a Windows varient.e  C It doesn't matter who wants what or who feels what. The reason it's1D vastly preferable to have Microsoft instead of IBM or anyone else as4 #1 is very simple: *Microsoft don't sell computers*.  F How quickly people forget. Before the rise of Microsoft, you bought an= IBM machine running an IBM operating system and then you were F restricted to IBM-compatible software. Or you bought a VAX running VMSA and then you were restricted to software compatible with that. OrgF Apple, Commodore, Data General, Acorn, Wang, etc etc. The industry was< fragmented into a zillion closed, proprietary platforms, allF incompatible with each other, all sold by companies who behaved not asE though they had X% market share, but as though they had a monopoly onx that X%.  F Now you can buy an industry standard PC from whatever manufacturer youC please, load Windows on it (for a definitely _non_ monopoly price),fE and mostly just not have to worry about compatibility issues. But you-D don't like Windows? Fine, take that same standard PC and load Linux,@ BSD, OS/2, BeOS etc etc etc, whatever takes your fancy. You toldB someone 20 years ago you'd be able to do that in 20 years time andC he'd think that was a miracle that made gigahertz chips look like aA trivial achievement.  F People tend not to respect what they have, but I'd really like to takeD the people who complain incessantly about "Micro$oft sucks" and makeF them spend a year in a parallel universe where _any_ other company hadA won the #1 spot. I guarantee you when they came back, 90% of thems6 would be making pilgrimages to Redmond on their knees.   -- t3 "Mercy to the guilty is treachery to the innocent."=+ Remove killer rodent from address to reply.=! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallaceS   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 16:55:23 -0600L. From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>Q Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopoly=& Message-ID: <3E4EC55B.4000204@fsi.net>   Russell Wallace wrote:  ; > On 15 Feb 2003 12:59:08 -0500, pechter@shell.monmouth.com  > (Bill/Carolyn Pechter) wrote:m >  > F >>IBM seemed to want to be the biggest and strongest computer company.I >>IBM seemed to want to be the leader and the standard.  I feel MicrosoftrF >>won't give up until EVERY piece of computing machine (including your4 >>car and toaster) boots and runs a Windows varient. >> > E > It doesn't matter who wants what or who feels what. The reason it'snF > vastly preferable to have Microsoft instead of IBM or anyone else as6 > #1 is very simple: *Microsoft don't sell computers*.    
 Wanna bet?    H > How quickly people forget. Before the rise of Microsoft, you bought an? > IBM machine running an IBM operating system and then you wereHH > restricted to IBM-compatible software. Or you bought a VAX running VMSC > and then you were restricted to software compatible with that. Ori7 > Apple, Commodore, Data General, Acorn, Wang, etc etc.o    J So, now you buy an "IBM-compatible" (how quickly we forgot THAT one, eh?) J running Windows and we are restricted to software that runs under Windows.  ) What's the difference? What's your point?i   > The industry was> > fragmented into a zillion closed, proprietary platforms, allH > incompatible with each other, all sold by companies who behaved not asG > though they had X% market share, but as though they had a monopoly oni
 > that X%. > H > Now you can buy an industry standard PC from whatever manufacturer you > please, load Windows    L ...but nothing else. After all, then you're no longer "industry standard"...  0 > on it (for a definitely _non_ monopoly price),    
 Try again.    ? > and mostly just not have to worry about compatibility issues.     E You've never run WhineBloze or anything that runs under it, have you?a  	 > But you,F > don't like Windows? Fine, take that same standard PC and load Linux,B > BSD, OS/2, BeOS etc etc etc, whatever takes your fancy. You toldD > someone 20 years ago you'd be able to do that in 20 years time andE > he'd think that was a miracle that made gigahertz chips look like ao > trivial achievement. > , > People tend not to respect what they have,    Q ..when it constantly crashes, causes them to reboot, re-install (the entire o.s.   for shit sake!), etc. ...'   > but I'd really like to takemF > the people who complain incessantly about "Micro$oft sucks" and makeH > them spend a year in a parallel universe where _any_ other company had > won the #1 spot. I guarantee    " ...but *I* doubt very seriously...   > you when they came back, 90%    " I'd make that considerably less...  	 > of theml8 > would be making pilgrimages to Redmond on their knees.   Keep dreaming...   -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems0 http://www.djesys.com/   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 00:50:04 +0100M* From: Morten Reistad <mrr@reistad.priv.no>Q Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopoly / Message-ID: <cnjm2b.liv.ln@via.reistad.priv.no>   8 According to Russell Wallace <rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net>:: >On 15 Feb 2003 12:59:08 -0500, pechter@shell.monmouth.com >(Bill/Carolyn Pechter) wrote: >lF >>IBM seemed to want to be the biggest and strongest computer company.I >>IBM seemed to want to be the leader and the standard.  I feel Microsoft F >>won't give up until EVERY piece of computing machine (including your4 >>car and toaster) boots and runs a Windows varient. > D >It doesn't matter who wants what or who feels what. The reason it'sE >vastly preferable to have Microsoft instead of IBM or anyone else asi5 >#1 is very simple: *Microsoft don't sell computers*.g  2 And IBM was probably the best behaved of the lot.   G >How quickly people forget. Before the rise of Microsoft, you bought ana> >IBM machine running an IBM operating system and then you wereG >restricted to IBM-compatible software. Or you bought a VAX running VMSvB >and then you were restricted to software compatible with that. OrG >Apple, Commodore, Data General, Acorn, Wang, etc etc. The industry was = >fragmented into a zillion closed, proprietary platforms, alliG >incompatible with each other, all sold by companies who behaved not asiF >though they had X% market share, but as though they had a monopoly on	 >that X%.f  F And, not only that, at their whim they _forced_ you through "upgrades"I that meant total incompatibility of your software and lots of rewrite andaJ port expenses. As far as I know there are no big (or intentional) problemsI with running W95 programs written according to official MS specificationsy? (i'll be kind and forget W 3) code on XP or any intervening OS.a  D And if there is a migration there are good reasons, and at least one8 intervening platform to do the port slow and controlled.  G >Now you can buy an industry standard PC from whatever manufacturer youtD >please, load Windows on it (for a definitely _non_ monopoly price),F >and mostly just not have to worry about compatibility issues. But youE >don't like Windows? Fine, take that same standard PC and load Linux,eA >BSD, OS/2, BeOS etc etc etc, whatever takes your fancy. You toldeC >someone 20 years ago you'd be able to do that in 20 years time and)D >he'd think that was a miracle that made gigahertz chips look like a >trivial achievement.l >sG >People tend not to respect what they have, but I'd really like to take E >the people who complain incessantly about "Micro$oft sucks" and maketG >them spend a year in a parallel universe where _any_ other company hadIB >won the #1 spot. I guarantee you when they came back, 90% of them7 >would be making pilgrimages to Redmond on their knees.   B And, remember how Microsoft fronted by Mr Gates WERE the good guys@ all through the eighties and some of the nineties. It just tellsB you how preceptions change. There is a reason why everyone went to8 buy from the software vendor that did NOT sell hardware.  B And, from a mid-eighties perspective current Windows would qualifyC as "unix-workalike". It certainly implements (or can implement, as  F through Cygwin etc) POSIX far better than say Eunice, Primix or NDix.   < I don't quite get how management of corporations can make so; much policy of using Windows/Linux/whatever. OK, some of usw= may feel a bit strongly about principles and implementations.-  C But none of this belongs as management policy. Does management haveoG policy about using Diesel or Petrol cars or what kinds of transmissionshD they use? Or if we use DC or AC power? Or the type of lighting used?  > All of these have been subject to similar bouts of widespread > flames and policy. All in vain. In college we had a course in E industrial economics, where we had some essays where industry leaders B were hotly discussing the merits of things like alternators versusB generators. Almost all of these were big issues in their time, and> they all got sorted out by the market 10 years later in a veryC quiet fashion; the same way that TCP/IP and the Internet is quietlyy8 taking over corporate communication networks these days.  A OK, so Microsoft is pushing it with their EULAs; but they are in sB the tracks of International Harvester, AT&T, Ford and IBM; and allB of these had similar struggles when they went from an expanding to@ a stable company. This phase will pass, and Microsoft will enter0 history beside these; possible even as a junior.    B Besides, in the grand picture; IT is still smaller than cosmetics.. And both of them combined is smaller than OIL.   -- mrr   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 02:46:10 GMTiL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")Q Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyk6 Message-ID: <00A1B8AA.F8C6E959@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>   In article <00A1B8A3.1B845CE5@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:dd >In article <3e4ebc62.258504087@news.eircom.net>, rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net (Russell Wallace) writes: >>H >>People tend not to respect what they have, but I'd really like to takeF >>the people who complain incessantly about "Micro$oft sucks" and makeH >>them spend a year in a parallel universe where _any_ other company hadC >>won the #1 spot. I guarantee you when they came back, 90% of them 8 >>would be making pilgrimages to Redmond on their knees. >eK >I dunno.  I think the world might be nicer if Digital Research had gotten -J >that slot.  They supported plenty of different hardware with CPM, CPM/86,J >Concurrent CPM, DR DOS, etc;  their APIs weren't insanely difficult, and I >they didn't have a pattern of incorporating weak versions of third-partysJ >software into the distributed OS to wreck the income streams of the thirdI >parties, nor did they "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" standards to destroy  >interoperability. >2O >And I never heard of them making computers at all.  (Microsoft made a CPM cardm: >for the Apple II which was essentially another computer.)  G Thinking about this more, I realize I was answering the wrong question.mL (I do still think that DRI would have been less of a blight on the technical landscape than MS.)d  G I realize that I'd much prefer the parallel universe where there was no)J company that owned 90% of the desktops.  Software monoculture isn't a goodJ thing, and new MS-based internet worms/viruses every week is the result ofI this ownership of the desktop (in combination with MS's cavalier attitudehI about security as something you bolt on afterward rather than design in).e  J If there has to be such a company, I'd prefer it to be one that didn't ownH the applications as well as the OS. I'd like the OS not to be completelyK trusting of any application - why is there an OS call that lets you get thewE contents of the Outlook address book? - and I'd like the OS to notice(I buffer overflows.  And I'd like it to actually follow standards set by anrJ external body so that people could write stuff that interoperated with it,H and not have the interface yanked out from under them all the time; thatK would allow some competition for the top spot.  (And while we're at it, I'duH like it to run on multiple processor architectures, like NT was supposed@ to, so there might be room for some competition and innovation.)  9 I'm not planning any pilgrimages on my knees to Redmond.     -- Alan     O =============================================================================== 0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056rM  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025uO ===============================================================================O   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 01:49:53 GMTeL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")Q Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyy6 Message-ID: <00A1B8A3.1B845CE5@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  c In article <3e4ebc62.258504087@news.eircom.net>, rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net (Russell Wallace) writes:t >tG >People tend not to respect what they have, but I'd really like to takesE >the people who complain incessantly about "Micro$oft sucks" and make G >them spend a year in a parallel universe where _any_ other company hadlB >won the #1 spot. I guarantee you when they came back, 90% of them7 >would be making pilgrimages to Redmond on their knees.t  J I dunno.  I think the world might be nicer if Digital Research had gotten I that slot.  They supported plenty of different hardware with CPM, CPM/86, I Concurrent CPM, DR DOS, etc;  their APIs weren't insanely difficult, and  H they didn't have a pattern of incorporating weak versions of third-partyI software into the distributed OS to wreck the income streams of the third H parties, nor did they "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" standards to destroy interoperability.   N And I never heard of them making computers at all.  (Microsoft made a CPM card9 for the Apple II which was essentially another computer.)r   -- Alane      O ===============================================================================t0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056?M  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025/O ===============================================================================o   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 20:05:31 -0600:1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>uQ Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopoly"' Message-ID: <3E4EF1EB.BB05C389@fsi.net>0  * Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote: > [snip]K > I dunno.  I think the world might be nicer if Digital Research had gotten K > that slot.  They supported plenty of different hardware with CPM, CPM/86, J > Concurrent CPM, DR DOS, etc;  their APIs weren't insanely difficult, andJ > they didn't have a pattern of incorporating weak versions of third-partyK > software into the distributed OS to wreck the income streams of the third J > parties, nor did they "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" standards to destroy > interoperability.   E In my pre-UN*X days, I had to work in RM/COBOL on some Televideo gearoE that ran MP/M. Seemed not that goofy (as 8-bit OSes go), and served a>+ small office (less than 12 "workstations").g   --   David J. Dachteral dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------   Date: 16 Feb 03 04:09:47 +0100) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)>Q Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyt) Message-ID: <n7HrovEHrkdI@elias.decus.ch>   \ In article <cnjm2b.liv.ln@via.reistad.priv.no>, Morten Reistad <mrr@reistad.priv.no> writes: > D > Besides, in the grand picture; IT is still smaller than cosmetics.0 > And both of them combined is smaller than OIL.   Nice one, Morten!    -- -
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Feb 2003 04:32:16 GMT From: rmk@rmkhome.com Q Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopolyh3 Message-ID: <3e4f144f$0$192$75868355@news.frii.net>o  I In alt.folklore.computers David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote:    > Wanna bet?  E THey certainly will be. They are working on an x86 box that will onlyT run Windoze.  L > So, now you buy an "IBM-compatible" (how quickly we forgot THAT one, eh?) L > running Windows and we are restricted to software that runs under Windows.  J And with the advent of winmodems, winprinters, winscanners, etc, you can't2 even use a lot of the hardware with other systems.  S > ..when it constantly crashes, causes them to reboot, re-install (the entire o.s. e > for shit sake!), etc. ...   ( And becomes infected on a regular basis.   -- g, rmk@rmkhome.com		http://www.rmkhome.com/~rmk   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 21:26:30 -0800 % From: Dean Woodward <deanw@rdrop.com> Q Subject: Re: IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM monopoly ( Message-ID: <3E4F2106.3090903@rdrop.com>   Russell Wallace wrote:E > It doesn't matter who wants what or who feels what. The reason it'smF > vastly preferable to have Microsoft instead of IBM or anyone else as6 > #1 is very simple: *Microsoft don't sell computers*.  , Um, what's the XBox, then? How about MSN TV?   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 15:56:32 GMTm. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)L Subject: Re: Inspecting VMS SMTP email contents - ie, Content filter gateway3 Message-ID: <Qqt3a.32138$h%6.440147@news.chello.at>o  ` In article <b2e7nl$f70h$1@news3.infoave.net>, "Jeff Morgan" <vmswiz@geonospamcities.com> writes:? >   It's really very simple. Here's the gist of how it works...  >[nice idea snipped]L >   Now, if anyone knows how to pass an external file with search phrases toF >the VMS search utility, please let me know! SEARCH X.TXT @PHRASES.TXTM >doesn't work. Defining sys$input doesn't seem to work either. My routine hasn9 >59 separate "searches" with about 30 phrases per search.n >oK >   It's a great waste of cpu cycles and i/o, but it catches 90% of all the 
 >spam for me.l  & How about	$ phrase1 = "search string1" 		$ phrasen = "search stringn"  		$ phrase30 = "search string30"1 		$ sea mail.file &phrase1,&phrasen,...,&phrase30   B >   You can also use a similar routine for Multinet's smtp queues.  L but unfortunately not as easy for MX (but MX has the SITE interface anyway).G And MX has RBL which is in my eyes the most effective way to stop spam.e Over 90% on my site...  ? >   Another technique I've used is that instead of stopping theaL >TCPIP$SMTP_nodename_01 que, set it to a job size maximum limit of 50 blocksK >or so. Anything larger than the limit will go pending. Then, you only needtG >to parse and test the largest emails. It would be highly unusual for acL >Microsoft attachment to be less than 25KB and skip past the content filter.  G Another nice idea. You could do(scan,cancel,release) this even by hand.: I'm impressed...   -- m Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERW% Network and OpenVMS system specialistl E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 18:24:41 +0100g6 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>) Subject: Re: Java & OSU Web Server on VMSn) Message-ID: <3E4E77D9.5090801@vajhoej.dk>e   Chuck Aaron wrote:J > Can anyone tell me if the OSU Webserver is capable of running JAVA, and ( > is anyone running JAVA on this server?  3 You can write a script in Java and use it with OSU.   - OSU does not contain a JSP/servlet container.r  = Neither does it contain connectors for JSP/servlet containersT (no AJP to Tomcat !).n   Arne   ------------------------------  + Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 17:25:34 -0700 (MST)m" From: John Nebel <nebel@csdco.com>> Subject: Mac file server on 7.3-1 works after VMS731_F11X V1.0G Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0302151722070.32561-100000@athena.csdco.com>.   This is good news.  @ The 24-Jan-2003 F11BXQP patch fixed the Mac file server on 7.3-1  
 John Nebel   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 15:13:35 GMTt# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>gY Subject: Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha RetaieK Message-ID: <zOs3a.700871$F2h1.203200@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>   < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3E4DBD29.9B5B91EB@fsi.net...f > Steve Spires wrote:s > >iF > > I'm not 100% sure of the reasons for skirting around who it was/is we'relE > > talking about here, but I'll guess that it's a company whose namey isD > > along the lines of Vehicle-Telephone-Big-building-for-storage if anyone > > wants to try and translate!o
 > > [snip] >u2 > Close as I can come is "Packard Bell Warehouse".     CarphoneWarehouse.co.uk ???f   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 11:44:00 -0600>1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>tY Subject: Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha Retain' Message-ID: <3E4E7C60.EB80D682@fsi.net>e   John Smith wrote:N > > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message# > news:3E4DBD29.9B5B91EB@fsi.net...n > > Steve Spires wrote:  > > > H > > > I'm not 100% sure of the reasons for skirting around who it was/is > we'reaG > > > talking about here, but I'll guess that it's a company whose namen > isF > > > along the lines of Vehicle-Telephone-Big-building-for-storage if > anyone! > > > wants to try and translate!  > > > [snip] > > 4 > > Close as I can come is "Packard Bell Warehouse". >  > CarphoneWarehouse.co.uk ???h  5 AH! .uk - That's probably why I've never heard of it.a   --   David J. Dachterap dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 14:20:33 GMTt0 From: rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net (Russell Wallace)2 Subject: Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium0 Message-ID: <3e4e4ca2.229891811@news.eircom.net>  5 On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 12:46:54 -0500, "Fred Kleinsorge"h0 <kleinsorge@star-dot-zko-dot-dec-dot-com> wrote:  K >The standard for Alpha is 9600 baud, so it will be compatable with all thepF >serial line devices currently being used, like LAT, SET HOST/DTE from >another VMS system, etc.    Ah, that makes sense.o   -- w3 "Mercy to the guilty is treachery to the innocent."E+ Remove killer rodent from address to reply.o! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallacem   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 14:26:49 GMTo0 From: rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net (Russell Wallace)2 Subject: Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium0 Message-ID: <3e4e4cb5.229910794@news.eircom.net>  B On 14 Feb 2003 21:58 CDT, carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) wrote:  = >Many, if not most, terminals won't communicate at 115200bps.I >  >Why should they?l >-? >Nobody can type anything resembling that fast, even in bursts.dH >Nobody can read anything resembling that fast as it scrolls by, either.  A Sure, but you need that speed for paging in a text editor withoutcC having it feel like trying to do a hundred-meter sprint while waistm deep in mud.  A Then again, it occurs to me the last time I used an actual serial9@ terminal was for doing programming assignments in college (afterE having used a text editor on a desktop machine at home, so I was usedy to a proper setup :P).  E In the current context, perhaps a full screen editor isn't the normal/C mode of use, and there's actually a need to try to read messages as3 they scroll by?r   -- h3 "Mercy to the guilty is treachery to the innocent."a+ Remove killer rodent from address to reply. ! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallaceB   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 22:17:05 GMTh. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)2 Subject: Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium3 Message-ID: <B%y3a.38654$h%6.515183@news.chello.at>t  r In article <3e4bc111$1_3@hpb10302.boi.hp.com>, "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star-dot-zko-dot-dec-dot-com> writes:G >Actually, I believe you are wrong here.  IA64 is discouraged.  ItaniumEC >Family Processor is how the chips are described.  But we are stillpL >struggling to figure out what we use.  We use OpenVMS VAX and OpenVMS AlphaF >today, but we can't use OpenVMS Itanium - so it may be something like( >OpenVMS for Itanium or some such thing.  E I thought "OpenVMS IPF" was already the winner of the name contest !?I  H It could also be "OpenVMS Itanic", so that no trademark is affected :-))  , >Of course, *I* like iVMS (the i is silent).  F No, not another product renaming effort. If you make a iVMS, then someH will probably request a aVMS and vVMS name change to get a common naming scheme again...t   -- n Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERa% Network and OpenVMS system specialist) E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 23:36:20 GMTi8 From: "Jerome H. Fine" <jhfineb9rv@b9rvnospamcompsys.to>2 Subject: Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium4 Message-ID: <3E4ECEE4.92B32C2F@b9rvnospamcompsys.to>  % >JoeBloggs@acme..spamless..com wrote:   0 > > On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:11:26 -0400, JF MezeiO > >Horror ! The thing booted with a microsoft windows used as console. HOW DAREA > >YOU !9 > Well, out of everyone here (in c.o.v) who uses Windows, : > I'd bet most, use it mostly/only for terminal emulators." > At least that's the case for me.   Jerome Fine replies:  > Hey - you are wrong!  I run Windows 98 SE for only one reason.6 I run the PDP-11 Erstaz-11 emulator by John Wilson at: http://www.dbit.com/? to run RT-11.  On a 750 MHz Pentium III, it runs about 15 timesGF the speed of a PDP-11/93.  When I feel it is cost effective to upgradeA again, I hope to run on a 3.6 GHz Pentium 4 at about 75 times thed speed of a PDP-11/93.d  = So BITE your tongue!  The VT100 terminal emulation is part of.@ Ersatz-11 and I have even added a command file to be as close as8 possible to a VT220 as far as the keyboard is concerned.   Sincerely yours,   Jerome Fines --4 To obtain the original e-mail address, please remove5 the ten characters which immediately follow the 'at'.h8 If you attempted to send a reply and the original e-mail7 address has been discontinued due a high volume of junku5 e-mail, then the semi-permanent e-mail address can be 7 obtained by replacing the four characters preceding theo. 'at' with the four digits of the current year.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 19:17:54 -0400 0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>2 Subject: Re: Photographs of VMS booting on Itanium/ Message-ID: <3E4ECAA2.5D37A887@vl.videotron.ca>e   Russell Wallace wrote:C > Sure, but you need that speed for paging in a text editor withouttE > having it feel like trying to do a hundred-meter sprint while waistw > deep in mud.  I Many of the older terminals suppoorted RS232 speeds that were higher thanoH their processor could handle in terms if processing the data (hence flowL control). VT 241 was one such terminal, as was the VT220. Setting it at 9600M or 19200 didn't make a whole big difference for full screen operation, albeitbS it would make for just dumping raw text in jump scroll without no escape sequences.u  F Note that where high RS232 speeds come into play is for machin-machine+ transfers, such as PDAs or digital cameras.f   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Feb 03 07:42:52 +0100) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)e= Subject: Possible replacements for PSPA (Performance Advisor)a) Message-ID: <om50SJtEZfoe@elias.decus.ch>    I am seeking advice here.5  @ A new system gives us the chance to avoid signing up for another6 PSPA (Polycenter Performance Advisor) license with CA.  J I have briefly looked at ECP (now included with VMS) and a couple of other> things, and with a bit of work, they are possible substitutes.  I However, on Friday morning I had to crash a system which had been hanging J overnight (not a production system, fortunately). According to an in houseD monitoring program, it had run out of pagefile space and SWAPPER hadA hit 78% CPU utilization at one point. OPERATOR.LOG only containedrE timestamps for the relevant period - specifically, no "pagefile full"u or similar messages.  F Running PSPA OTOH, showed in great detail the events leading up to the: hang, and gave a faster route to determining the offending* application than analyzing the crash dump.  O Now, having just started looking at ECP (on a different cluster unfortunately),oH I see that it collects a similar, slightly larger volume of data as PSPAF (going by disk space consumed - I haven't dug into the respective fileJ formats), but does not contain anything like the same reporting facilites.  L My first thought was that Availability Manager could act as a substitute forE this sort of diagnosis, but from what I have read about it so far, itcD acts on current live data rather than stuff stored in history files.  F The timing of this system hang was a blessing in disguise. I was givenG the job of trying to avoid buying another PSPA license on Wednesday, so D started looking at ECP and alternatives then, but now I am forced toJ look beyond the pretty workload  graphs we produce every week for capacity> planning and think about the problem diagnosis side of things.  7 Alternatives suggested by our OVMS Ambassador include: '  J o - T4 (Tabular Timeline Tracking Tool). This was mentioned in the OpenVMSH     Times (Vol 2, #1) and caused enough confusion in this newsgroup that?     it merited an "Ask the Wizard" question. It can be found at 9     http://www.openvms.compaq.com/freeware/freeware50/t4/yF     although it does not exist in our disk copy of the V5 freeware CD.  D     To summarize briefly, it is a chunk of DCL to convert the outputA     from MONITOR/RECORD into CSV files suitable for import into an     spreadsheet.  A     We can get those graphs out, but can we diagnose the problems "     leading up to a hang or crash?  C o - ECP - despite my comments above about the interactive interface-A     lacking the scope provided by PSPA, it can produce CSV files.o+     More research on my part required here.s  D     Again can get those graphs out, but can we diagnose the problemsA     leading up to a hang or crash? Is the format of the recording-2     files published so that we can "roll our own"?  @ o - Fortel's Sightline. Can anyone tell me if this can do what IA     am trying to find? - i.e. look at recorded history leading upr     to a hang or crash.R  ( Your input and comments are appreciated. -- o
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 17:00:13 -0000a! From: Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net>h- Subject: Re: Read/Write from a global sectiona/ Message-ID: <v4ssgtm1uae4c8@corp.supernews.com>   . Roy Omond <Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com> wrote:E : Eh, as Larry rightly points out, the names are not going to change.d   The names INSIDE the program.C   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 13:09:24 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)r- Subject: Re: Read/Write from a global sectionm3 Message-ID: <jGvEX183zfEo@eisner.encompasserve.org>i  S In article <v4ssgtm1uae4c8@corp.supernews.com>, Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> writes:-0 > Roy Omond <Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com> wrote:G > : Eh, as Larry rightly points out, the names are not going to change.o >  > The names INSIDE the program.D  E If the names inside the program change uniformly, nothing goes wrong. D If not all instances are changed, things will go wrong regardless of% whether a system service is involved.-   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 01:07:23 GMTi. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)4 Subject: Re: Restore of System to a different Server3 Message-ID: <fvB3a.41202$h%6.543447@news.chello.at>.  b In article <6f1d9079.0302140649.6bf36e9@posting.google.com>, SY1333@AOL.COM (Sean Yazdani) writes:F >Is it possible to restore a complete system backup (standalone image)A >from one Alpha server to another Alpha server that has differentoC >physical device names (e.g. from DRA0,1,2 to DKB0,100,200 but withg >same size, and both on 7.1-2).n   No problem at all.G I did my first VMS installation in 1987 (V4.6) and did (until recently)'I only upgrade since then. New machines simply booted into a cluster or got1H a backup of the system disk and then modified some files (MODPARAMS.DAT,H *SYS.PAR, ...). I never used hardcoded disk names (as on of the previous system managers) so I had luck.u  G But, there a some gotchas. You can't avoid using physical devices namesVI with eg. network (DECnet-Plus, UCX) and you can't prepare a working TCPIPlK configuration with the old nodename for a new nodename (TCPIP$CONFIGURATIONd is indexed with the nodename).  F The license database includes _all_ my licenses (with /INCLUDE) and isE therefore also no problem after disk copying, but, in standalone modeaH VMS unfortunately ignores /INCLUDE and you might get problems because ofI loading too much licenses (a wrong one prevents - eg. cause of a designedo, incompatibility - the load of the right one)  E So, to answer your question, this is VMS not Winbloze. You don't even D need a equal size disk. I did copies to smaller disks, too. I did it9 with /INIT and with /NOINIT. It simply works. Go ahead...o   -- b Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERr% Network and OpenVMS system specialistl E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 11:38:56 -0600u1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>a/ Subject: Re: SIMH 2.10-1 VAX binaries for Win32 ' Message-ID: <3E4E7B30.7D25B5BF@fsi.net>y   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > ] > In article <3E4DC0CA.C9789EE0@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:o > E > > Actually, what we need is a version of VAX emulator that does note > > require an underlying o.s. > G > There is one -- instead of an operating system it runs on Windows !!!i  C ;-) ...and of course, as everyone knows, WhineBloze is not an o.s.!    -- . David J. Dachterao dba DJE Systemsl http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/0   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 20:20:36 -00004 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>/ Subject: Re: SIMH 2.10-1 VAX binaries for Win32t5 Message-ID: <20030215202036.5661.qmail@gacracker.org>   " -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----  > On 14 Feb 2003, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) wrote:< >In article <3E4DC0CA.C9789EE0@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera"  ><djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes: >tD >> Actually, what we need is a version of VAX emulator that does not >> require an underlying o.s.' >eF >There is one -- instead of an operating system it runs on Windows !!!  - %KBD-I-INVINP, coffee is not acceptable inputn    Damn! Now I need a new keyboard.     Doc. - --  6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.nett   -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----a Version: N/A  @ iQEVAwUBPk108sriC3SGiziTAQGUHAgAhT63b1GblLlp2z01tPG46vBcAFrjD4ha@ Wpfxik9uQuHmSV1NnekHZcCZV4YQwz18jcKQ7ITSqAeqoWv6FMHmP8BLYGtKOxn9@ 6MNsn8mtps/1c3E6qcwnHyArgWeIZGLwMk5mqEzuC6RoFdoKbcLJmQP1I4okCNCu@ /THrONG8NZuj9tOKCjzRZ+j74GNQegj69vi03MzfQKi3AD5Fm3MaHs2r38qbLuME@ UIBuLgjmEgE6KaGZJJiIJgXJgewUv41h2weVx4hr+qslxUTKqFrYDp/ilAEuPkS08 n/LniNytxcmh6OfrlNV73lV64AgTerApfbQide4qs6DPRyiyxlG9rw== =Jr5Ja -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----u   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 00:27:23 GMT . From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)/ Subject: Re: SIMH 2.10-1 VAX binaries for Win32r3 Message-ID: <LVA3a.40688$h%6.543447@news.chello.at>   [ In article <3E4E7B30.7D25B5BF@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:eD >;-) ...and of course, as everyone knows, WhineBloze is not an o.s.!  A I said this too for years. I used the term "Application Launcher"i  K But since NT5 (means Win2000) I can no longer moan. NT5 meets my definition G of an opsys. There are betters, faster, cheaper, more featured and moreyK stable ones (as we all know), but it now has already all bells of an opsys.    -- d Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialiste E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 15:13:37 GMTk0 From: rw@vorpalbunnyeircom.net (Russell Wallace); Subject: Re: SKHPC slaps Gartner, naysayers on comp vms ...r0 Message-ID: <3e4e57d1.232755518@news.eircom.net>  1 On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 00:29:57 GMT, Vance Haemmerle $ <vance@toyvax.Glendale.CA.US> wrote:   >Russell Wallace wrote:  >> dF >> Dear God, they kept producing Betamax all the way up to a couple ofG >> months ago? Must be that Japanese code of honor thing. I'd rate thatm* >> as keeping their promise and then some. >-3 >  They stopped selling them in the US around 1998.M >r& >  So "forever" means 10 years to you?  C For electronic equipment, yes. Note that end of sales in 1998 meansIE second hand machines will be available for at least another 10 years,d> probably more like 20. Well before then it will be possible toD transfer your Betamax video collection to digital format, so you canB truly keep it forever. If you take the intent of Sony's promise as= being "you can invest in a library of Betamax videos with the D assurance you won't have to write it off" then that promise has been kept.m  C Did you expect that in five billion years when the Sun goes off thei> main sequence, a Betamax factory would be among the industrialD facilities moved out of the inner solar system? If not, what did you interpret "forever" to mean?  ' > How have your marriage(s) worked out?    I'm not married.  # > This is getting very off topic...w  ? Yes, but it's as fun to shoot the bull about video recorders asa operating systems :)   --  3 "Mercy to the guilty is treachery to the innocent."M+ Remove killer rodent from address to reply.n! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallacec   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 16:23:09 GMT,. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)< Subject: Re: Support for Gigabit Ethernet Clusters on Marvel3 Message-ID: <NPt3a.32521$h%6.459052@news.chello.at>b  q In article <cf15391e.0302121259.6658adc4@posting.google.com>, keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) writes:hj >"James Gessling" <jgessling@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<b2b19l$1b44vc$1@ID-46415.news.dfncis.de>...A >> Does this mean LAN fastpath support too?  That would be great.o >g2 >Fast_Path for LANs is presently slated for 7.3-2.  F ... which should be called OpenVMS Alpha V7.5 (just like V7.3-1 shouldI be called V7.4). Am I the only one who doesn't understand why a so calledhE maintenance version contains more new features than bugfixes - or newp featues at all ?   just curious   -- b Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERf% Network and OpenVMS system specialist, E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------    Date: 15 Feb 2003 11:56:41 -0800. From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)V Subject: Re: [OT] Windows Calculator (was Re: HP hideousness of the OPenVMS web pages)= Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0302151156.4873a3c1@posting.google.com>c  e Dave Greenwood <greenwoodde@ornl.gov> wrote in message news:<14FEB03.21520398@feda34.fed.ornl.gov>...eH > In a previous article, spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman) wrote: > [snip]D > > Interestingly, it says that 0**0 is 1. I always thought that wasG > > undefined, but in a way it actually makes a lot of sense. Any other H > > number to the zeroth power is 1. And the limit of x**0 as x --> 0 isH > > 1, so why not define it that way? Also, zero to the minus one is 1/0H > > which could be taken to imply that the 1 is zero to the zeroth powerG > > (0**0). Otherwise, why would you use it as a numerator (1, i.e.) tot > > get 0**-1? > F > It may be "interesting" and may "make sense" but I'm quite sure it'sC > wrong.  IIRC, the proof that x**0 = 1 (x><0) goes something like:s > ; >   x**0 = x**(a-a) = (x*a) / (x*a) = (b) / (b) = b / b = 1a > " > but b/b is only defined if b<>0.  @ Yes, I am familiar with that. But upon seeing 0**0 pop up as 1 I/ decided to attempt a fresh look at the problem.   > The argument you present above only shows that that particularF approach does not yield a definite answer. I wouldn't call it a proof.E You could take the limit of x**0 as x goes to 0 and that gives 1. I'm D not sure that counts as a proof either, but the result is consistentA with your argument because your argument says 0**0 = 0/0 which islF indeterminate, meaning that it doesn't determine an answer. But by theD same token it doesn't rule out an answer either! So I would concludeC that your argument really says "Well, if there is an answer to thiss1 problem, we surely can't figure it out this way!",  E It's like the ratio test. Suppose you have a series and you'd like toeE know if it converges or not. You apply the ratio test, and suppose itgC comes out to 1. Well, you could then say "Well, we can't tell if ittD converges or not!" But usually you can by using an alternate method.C So similarly maybe there's an alternate method for computing 0**0. r' That's why I don't consider it a proof.n  D You could look at it at other ways. Why is x**(-1) = 1/x? Why the 1?E Because 1 is the multiplicative identity. And in the recent factorialrD discussion, one point of view considered 0! defined by simply sayingE n! = 1*2*3*...*n and saying "Well, for zero, there are no factors, so B the answer is one." One poster went so far as to describe 1 as theB null "product". So you can say that whenever you have a definitionF involving a variable number of factors, then in the particular case ofE zero factors, the answer is 1. So 0**0 would equal 1 by that point of3 view.E  A You could also say x**(-1) = x**(0-1) = x**0/x**1. But if x**0 istD undefined for x = 0, then so is 0**-1. Ah, but 0**-1 = 1/0, you say.E But why the 1? It's 1 because that is what x**0 is. I mean, you don't>9 just pick 1 out of the air. You pick it because it is thelA multiplicative identity and because it is x**0. In which case youo! could conclude that 0**0 = 1 (!).y  D Okay, I'm not sure if any of these are valid mathematical arguments.F But these are other ways to look at the problem and they are enough toB make me reconsider the whole problem anew. Basically, if you startD with x**1 and define other powers based from that, then yes, 0**0 isF undefined. But if you start with x**0 = 1, then 0**0 = 1 and you stillE get all the other usual results. I'm not sure if either point of view  is superior.  D Another point of view: What is 0**1? 0. What is 0**(1/2)? 0. What isA 0**(p/q) where p and q are positive integers? Well, take the q-thsC root, which for 0 is always 0, and multiply that by itself p times,i? which again gives 0. Easy. BUT, what is 0**r where r is a real, E non-rational positive number? Not so easy. In the case where the basetC is not zero, mathematicians (it was Euler, actually, IIRC) extended 9 the definition of raising numbers to powers by "defining"w  ,     ln(x) = Integral from t=1 to t=x of dt/t  C and defining "exponentiation" as a**x = exp(x ln a) where exp(x) isnE the inverse of ln(x). (This definition has other advantages, but thisf article is getting too long.)   F Now, this doesn't help when the base is zero. But those who claim thatF 0**0 is undefined have no problem saying that 0**r = 0 for r any real,A non-rational positive number. I assume they do this by taking the D limit as r is approached by a suitable sequence of rational numbers.B So 0**sqrt(2), for example, would be the limit of 0**1.4, 0**1.41,B 0**1.414, ..., which converges to zero. But then I get myself intoB trouble here because the limit of 0**x as x-->0 is 0. (!)  But the" limit of x**0 as x goes to 0 is 1!  F Oh well, I can't explain it, but for some reason I feel the lim(x-->0)A x**0 has more validity. But that's JMHO. I guess I prefer case A:eE graph of x**0 being equal to 1 for all real x and graph of 0**x beinglF 1 at x=0 and 0 for all positive x to case B: graph of x**0 being equalD to 1 for all real x with a "hole" at x=0 and a graph of 0**x being 06 for all positive real x and null for all other real x.  ? I wonder why the Windows Calculator gives 1 for 0**0. Was it anmC oversight? Or is this perhaps a controversial issue in the world of= math?=  / Anyway, just some more thoughts on this issue.    @ > Btw, the CDE calculator responds with "Error" if you try 0**0.  
 What is CDE? f  . BTW, my HP 32S gives "INVALID y**x" for 0**0.    > IANAMS > Dave > --------------; > Dave Greenwood                Email: Greenwoodde@ORNL.GOV=J > Oak Ridge National Lab        %STD-W-DISCLAIMER, I only speak for myself   Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldman3   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2003.093 ************************