1 INFO-VAX	Sun, 26 Dec 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 716       Contents:' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft ' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft  Re: DECnet IV address 1.0  Re: Needing some help  Re: Needing some help  OT Re: WHOIS 1.6 updated B Re: [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-2] GETDVI Item for Volume Size and Limit ?I Re: [OpenVMS V7.3-2] GETDVI Item for Volume Owner (and Volume Protection) I Re: [OpenVMS V7.3-2] GETDVI Item for Volume Owner (and Volume Protection)   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 21:57:06 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft, Message-ID: <41CE2882.7080003@tsoft-inc.com>   JF Mezei wrote:    > Dave Froble wrote: > Q >>I'm hoping that the case is left hanging, and not finally settled.  Not sure if P >>it's still open.  But, if open, another administration could 'finish' the case >>in a more appropriate manner.  >> > I > My guess is that anyone could find some reason to charge Microsoft with P > anti-competitive behaviour at any point in time. So there may not be a need to > reopen old cases.  > P > However, in 4 years, the Microsoft market share may be on a steady decline, inN > which case, monopoly legal actions may no longer really be necessary or give= > politicians an image of them fighting to protect consumers.  >   P I really wouldn't count on that.  Too many applications for windows.  I've been O told too many times that the windows user interface is so well known, and easy  O to learn, and any new hires would already know how to use windows.  Not really  L universally true.  So what?  If the decision makers have already made their ? decision, they will refuse to be affected by facts and reality.    Dave   ------------------------------    Date: 25 Dec 2004 22:29:07 -0800$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com>0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for MicrosoftC Message-ID: <1104042547.690118.274880@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > > In article <cqcasg$o4u$1@news3.zwoll1.ov.home.nl>, Dirk Munk > <munk@home.nl> writes: > D > > Today Microsoft got a fine of 497 million euro (US $650 million) from theB > > European Court. The reason is misuse of monopoly position etc. Furthermore M$C > > has to remove Mediaplayer from the Windows-XP distribution, and  publish the 9 > > API's for communication with periphirals. Nice ......  > E > I don't like Microsoft software due to the low quality, so I simply A > don't use it.  I don't really see the point of the proceedings,  though. G > Why shouldn't anyone be able to offer anything---say an OS with a web G > browser and media player integrated---take it or leave it.  As far as F > I'm concerned, it doesn't matter if the web browser and media player are C > intentionally unnecessarily integratated into the OS to the point  where G > alternatives can't be installed.  If you don't like it, don't buy it.    > D > By requiring Microsoft to publish their specifications and offer aA > version of Windows without media player, the courts are in fact G > confirming that Microsoft software IS the de-facto standard.  I'm not   E > saying it isn't, but I don't think it is the business of the courts  toF > tell the world that, for better or worse, the world has to live with > Microsoft.  F Then what *should* the courts do in your opinion? Nothing? Demand thatF Microsoft come up with another OS to compete with itself? Apologies if I'm missing something obvious.   ------------------------------  + Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 21:45:49 +0000 (UTC) 6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)" Subject: Re: DECnet IV address 1.01 Message-ID: <newscache$nora9i$90c1$1@news.sil.at>   o In article <cqcaa3$76j$2@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>, gartmann@non.immunbio.mpg.de.sens (Christoph Gartmann) writes: J >I just discovered that our cluster alias has an id of "1.0". But for someO >reason it is impossible to remove the alias and recreate it with this address. M >Why? Was it valid in the past and now in OpenVMS 7.3-1 no longer? Or is it a  >bug in NCP?  % 1.0 was never a valid DECnet address. M Get rid of it and don't waste your time to find out who/where/when allows it.    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % 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, 25 Dec 2004 23:50:15 +0100 , From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems.dotweg@zonnet.nl> Subject: Re: Needing some help, Message-ID: <33696vF3svm5aU1@individual.net>  8 "Antonio Carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> schreef in bericht  news:41CDAE74.1070602@iee.org... > Hans Vlems wrote: I > > Firmware for the VAX systems was installed by DEC field service. They  were= > > not sent to customers like the AXP firmware upgrade kits.  > J > Firmware for the VAX 7000 series was on some of the firmware CDs and wasD > (possibly still is) available from the HP web site. Only the later@ > VAXen and VAXstations had the console firmware in flash and so > could be updated.  > G > The rest had firmware in EPROM and so required a physical swap for an F > upgrade. Given that an upgrade in those cases would cost real money,D > they only occurred if really needed, and then only on an as-needed > basis. > A > Some VAXen could have the microcode patched (VAX-11/750 and VAX C > 82x0/83x0 spring to mind) so those sometimes had patch files that D > shipped as part of an OS upgrade and would be loaded at each boot. > * > > Unlike the AXP, a VAX is a VAX, right? > F > I think that an Alpha is an Alpha too: both had an upwardly upgradedH > architecture and both had their share of waivers issued (i.e. machinesF > that failed to implement some obscure corner of the architecture but$ > were allowed to get away with it). > 	 > Antonio  >  > @ Yes, but an Alpha is more like the PDP-11. Later models had moreD instructions. The VAX hardware might miss instructions and they wereJ emulated in software (microVAX I and microVAX II were the first examples).   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 16:00:41 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>  Subject: Re: Needing some help( Message-ID: <opsjk8zfnazgicya@hyrrokkin>  J On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:50:15 +0100, Hans Vlems <hvlems.dotweg@zonnet.nl>   wrote:   > : > "Antonio Carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> schreef in bericht" > news:41CDAE74.1070602@iee.org... >> Hans Vlems wrote:J >> > Firmware for the VAX systems was installed by DEC field service. They > were> >> > not sent to customers like the AXP firmware upgrade kits. >>K >> Firmware for the VAX 7000 series was on some of the firmware CDs and was E >> (possibly still is) available from the HP web site. Only the later A >> VAXen and VAXstations had the console firmware in flash and so  >> could be updated. >>H >> The rest had firmware in EPROM and so required a physical swap for anG >> upgrade. Given that an upgrade in those cases would cost real money, E >> they only occurred if really needed, and then only on an as-needed 	 >> basis.  >>B >> Some VAXen could have the microcode patched (VAX-11/750 and VAXD >> 82x0/83x0 spring to mind) so those sometimes had patch files thatE >> shipped as part of an OS upgrade and would be loaded at each boot.  >>+ >> > Unlike the AXP, a VAX is a VAX, right?  >>G >> I think that an Alpha is an Alpha too: both had an upwardly upgraded I >> architecture and both had their share of waivers issued (i.e. machines G >> that failed to implement some obscure corner of the architecture but % >> were allowed to get away with it).  >>
 >> Antonio >> >>B > Yes, but an Alpha is more like the PDP-11. Later models had moreF > instructions. The VAX hardware might miss instructions and they wereC > emulated in software (microVAX I and microVAX II were the first    > examples). > C Well in a sense Alpha was no different,  we had to provide software D emulation for things like C = A + B; where these were 16bit integersD This was, of course an error on the part of the cpu designers, later% corrected, with the 21064, I believe.        --  C Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 14:09:20 -0600   From: Mike <mwjenkins@excel.com> Subject: OT 8 Message-ID: <j3irs05utm46lc4nelahjqd7kc3g2ib92r@4ax.com>  8 Have a Merry Christmas, y'all, and a prosperus New Year!   Mike& http://www.geocities.com/mwjenkins001/   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 01:40:10 -0000 6 From: "Alex Daniels" <AlexNoSpamDaniels@themail.co.uk> Subject: Re: WHOIS 1.6 updated5 Message-ID: <41ce167a$0$1386$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>   : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message< news:1103991714.6e793c838ad4622678632f26dde7b370@teranews...L > I found a big in my WHOIS program located at http://www.vaxination.ca/vms/ > E > Version 1.6 added support for AS number lookups (eg; WHOIS AS812 ).  However,I > it was unable to lookup which server was responsible for any autonomous  system > numbers above 32767 :-)  > J > I fixed the problem. I also checked the list of WHOIS servers and it had not E > changed since version 1.6 of whois was produced. So I didn't bother 
 generating > a new version. > I > So if you download WHOIS016.ZIP today, it contains the fixed definition  for an' > ASnumber table, and no other changes.  > J > There is no real need to update your executable if you rarely use the AS > number lookup function.   D I see http://www.vaxination.ca/vms/whois.html is still FUDing TCP/IPH Services. Last time I pointed this out, you responded on 05-Jun-2004 and6 acknowledged TCP/IP Services does have a whois client.  J Maybe while you are waiting for a compile on your "mighty MicroVAX II" you can  update the page.  J I also consider it pretty bad practice to release new versions of the sameF software, without changing the version number, no matter how small the change.    Alex   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 01:31:56 -0000 6 From: "Alex Daniels" <AlexNoSpamDaniels@themail.co.uk>K Subject: Re: [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-2] GETDVI Item for Volume Size and Limit ? 5 Message-ID: <41ce148e$0$1372$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>   < "Rob Brooks" <brooks@cuebid.zko.dec.nospam> wrote in message' news:vlD8pNz7HLCa@cuebid.zko.dec.com... L > It is *possible" that there may be inconsistencies between what is the theL > documentation (hardcopy, online, CD, etc...) vs. what is in DCL HELP.  TheK > updating of DCL help is a slightly different procedure, and it's possible  thatJ > an engineer may not be as diligent regarding HELP, although we certainly get I > hounded by the doc writers (who don't get the credit they deserve; they   > really do an outstanding job).  L I agree they do a fab job, the VMS docs are legendary and I can not think of any better.   F I do think however, that they do get credit, remember Ken Olsen's fine praise for them...    F With UNIX, if you're looking for something, you can easily and quicklyF check that small manual and find out that it's not there. With VMS, no matterL what you look for -- it's literally a five-foot shelf of documentation -- ifL you look long enough it's there. That's the difference -- the beauty of UNIX= is it's simple; and the beauty of VMS is that it's all there. : - Ken Olsen, president of DEC, DECWORLD Vol. 8 No. 5, 1984   Alex   ------------------------------  + Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 21:30:37 +0000 (UTC) 6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)R Subject: Re: [OpenVMS V7.3-2] GETDVI Item for Volume Owner (and Volume Protection)1 Message-ID: <newscache$azqa9i$omb1$1@news.sil.at>   _ In article <PoM0DpPa4x6o@cuebid.zko.dec.com>, brooks@cuebid.zko.dec.nospam (Rob Brooks) writes: P >> I also don't find an item for the Volume Owner (name not UIC). Is there one ? >  >$ sho sys/noproc M >OpenVMS V7.3-2  on node CUEBID  22-DEC-2004 12:19:25.71  Uptime  13 19:41:27 9 >$ write sys$output f$getdvi( "sys$sysdevice", "ownuic" ) 	 >[SYSTEM]   F No. OWNUIC is the item for the Owner UIC. I was looking for the VolumeI Owner UIC. I don't know what exactly the difference is, but there is one. L At least there is a difference shown in SHOW DEVICE (but not in my example):   ... O     Owner process                 ""    Owner UIC                      [SYSTEM] O     Owner process ID        00000000    Dev Prot            S:RWPL,O:RWPL,G:R,W  ... O     Volume owner UIC        [SYSTEM]    Vol Prot    S:RWCD,O:RWCD,G:RWCD,W:RWCD  ...   O OTOH, there is only VPROT and no PROT either. Now, what game is the right one ?    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------    Date: 25 Dec 2004 22:06:13 -0500/ From: brooks@cuebid.zko.dec.nospam (Rob Brooks) R Subject: Re: [OpenVMS V7.3-2] GETDVI Item for Volume Owner (and Volume Protection)- Message-ID: <DyRj$kT5XTIq@cuebid.zko.dec.com>   8 peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:3 > brooks@cuebid.zko.dec.nospam (Rob Brooks) writes:  >> >>$ sho sys/noprocN >>OpenVMS V7.3-2  on node CUEBID  22-DEC-2004 12:19:25.71  Uptime  13 19:41:27: >>$ write sys$output f$getdvi( "sys$sysdevice", "ownuic" )
 >>[SYSTEM] > H > No. OWNUIC is the item for the Owner UIC. I was looking for the VolumeK > Owner UIC. I don't know what exactly the difference is, but there is one. N > At least there is a difference shown in SHOW DEVICE (but not in my example): >  > ... Q >     Owner process                 ""    Owner UIC                      [SYSTEM] Q >     Owner process ID        00000000    Dev Prot            S:RWPL,O:RWPL,G:R,W  > ... Q >     Volume owner UIC        [SYSTEM]    Vol Prot    S:RWCD,O:RWCD,G:RWCD,W:RWCD   J It looks like $ SHOW DEVICE /FULL uses the system service SYS$GET_SECURITY$ to get the volume owner information.   --    M Rob Brooks    VMS Engineering -- I/O Exec Group     brooks!cuebid.zko.dec.com    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.716 ************************                                                              'N"~ю~| 	  6z #
 d9yk#oA/bj90c7-zW:Ֆӣ͊7&p}/Uk5*{Y;Մ; 6Ca0b,^nցTιRd~U
k<Kai]yh#< J
mpx -h^6uBIQ|9U)ސw4v@./qMY[8k0O9 $+*,4߁~yGCv xP?w0f"a g֫Yu3@'jhOUkU=\)6d'yM(o$@xG?۠T_C>P"Υ<+,z0<j~#/1ec#'
9|dUQG=u!_=y^G$B >şE JNTNӉ4-e:p䁟$GaIFuL$tCnj~``D)ywm?x[gE	
C?`"%Cѣ
C?p/y6] <e9sr )33s{C?F9Zi3O~݁s_nY`'R8 3[Nh9o

-1)Zbi aU'V$0(u:XWA#^ۉ偟Heq!
vw¸u3#B_s}y[Y`,2,Ob E0 ],M<ތNlKlq?gd˰8t|+[2KA-2G7To;S|@ne!ЅdQxj(͉W8	(M)t_GCXƕ20!Z
&S,~I&,rәhYNsng3>Wu		`b=r%H5ƺӘ{<9c+%~n[5
'Ӑ#gQɟӷ {!t 1)/WAl:hbXԣq7:
l)$'0.sSLHA.T>>fCP'3a'7ؠ9!H0,BHƌdp/P/lLP¥kwaWWcU{тAߋ+L*
cK`;r	.o n )xHbjaoq눟$I`pR@VlΒ
ϒς	H&r~n`UQw,d"|ɷ+ vMS#wyIʽNTP]X-;X1| :![UIyke.'v(ɺWQ߲ߺ~bW
^ݲZ7POT8		XbEl=#%nd/,#F"^ݒHz<*|y~L7񯁵ο⩪5Y~ nJy_w|ԍ^2
#XNő#g{]))];71!L0wMրzXFW 08||i/=hWЛoJyGCϡ`HGBRJ@BLg0;0-wh	l2K?{q/3c8k
C^'m)VHZMssHz<lJkmwsڲ@JYS8F[yY?|$,BͤR2?Ty0BU@!bE'~XBkYLÐĸ.ȌEq<d).