1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 28 Dec 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 721       Contents:' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft ' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft ' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft ' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft ' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft ' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft ' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft ' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft ' Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft  Re: HP exodus to Intel) Re: Legato vs VMS Backup -- Recover Speed  Need UNIX clarification  Re: Need UNIX clarification * Re: Older StorageWorks Parts Not Available* Re: pscp, psftp problem with MULTINET V5.0 TeX / LaTeX for Open VMS Re: Time to revive Emerald?  Re: Time to revive Emerald? " Re: TruCluster/AdvFS open-sourced? Re: WHOIS 1.6 updated  Re: WHOIS 1.6 updated P RE: [SPAM] - Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft - Bayesian F	ilter detected  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:43:37 +0100 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft- Message-ID: <cqqvd8$1ba5$1@news.cybercity.dk>    Tom Linden wrote: 5 > On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:18:33 +0100, Karsten Nyblad    > <nospam@nospam.nospam>  wrote: >  >> Dave Froble wrote: J >> At current Linux has a market share of about 10% on servers and 3% on  I >> desktops.  Both market shares seems to be growing about 25% per year.  I >> It  is reasonable to declare victory when Linux has a market share of  G >> 50%.   Assuming that Linux's market share continues to grow 25% per  G >> year Linus  will have 50% market in something like 2010 and 2015 on  + >> the servers and  desktops, respectively.  >  > Big assumption  E Very true.  Making predictions on what happens in 5-10 years a market > that chenges as fast as the computer market is very dangerous.  E >> It is not likely that Linux suddenly pushes Windows and the other  C >> OSes  out of the market.  However, it is very likely that Linux  G >> continues to  win market share and over a two digit number of years  - >> presses all other  OSes out of the market.  >>E >> Everybody who believe Linux has no chance of pressing proprietary  F >> Oses  out of the market, should read Clayton M. Christensen:  "The I >> Innovator's  Dilemma."  Christensen clearly demonstrates what happens  G >> when new  products using disruptive technologies enter a market and  H >> the new  product does not meet the main customer groups needs, has a G >> low gross  margin and the potential market is little.  When the new  B >> product becomes  better, it pushes the old products out of the I >> market.  The interesting  thing is that the old companies rarely have  D >> success producing the new  product, in the beginning because the J >> people of the old companies do not  understand that they need to fight B >> the new product viciously and later  because the new companies G >> producing the new product have become the  established producers of   >> the new products. > 8 > Does the model fit?  Is Linux a disruptive technology?  G In Christensen's framework a disruptive technology does not need to be  E new.  In fact he developed his theory while studying hard disks.  It  I turns out that in the hard disk market the disruptive technology was the  G size of the box holding the disk.  When smaller boxes were introduced,  G existing hard disk producers lost because existing customers could not  F use the new disks because they could not hold enough data, but in all I cases there were new markets that could use the new technology.  The new  H hard disk companies had become the established players on the market of C the smaller disks when the technology had developed enough for the  B smaller disks to take over the market held by the older hard disk C companies.  Christensen disclosed that happening when the industry  H changed from 14" to 8" to 5 1/4" and to 3 1/2".  The old companies have G been successful on the 2 1/2" market because the customers of portable  ? computers could use the 2 1/2" disks in stead of 3 1/2" disks.  G Christensen's theory is a few years old and of course it is well known  F in the hard disk industry.  Even then it seems like the old hard disk D companies have troubles getting into the 1.8" and 1" market of hard D disks for hand held equipment.  It is too difficult for managers to I understand that they may have to fight in small markets with small gross  G margins.  Hard disk companies have rarely disappeared because they did  8 not master new technologies like better hard disk heads.  I If you ask Christensen why Digital lost, he will not tell the story told  D by the VMS fans in c.o.v.  He would tell you the story of a company F having trouble competing on price with companies like Sun, Apollo and G later on with PC companies.  He would claim that Digital never learned  I to be lean and mean enough to competitive.  He will tell you about small  F companies that started growing at the same time, Digital was the Wall G Street darling.  Digital had better products at higher prices, but the  I competitors products were good enough to meet the needs om the customers.   H I think the main difference between the OS market and the other markets G is Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer.  They understand the threat Linux and  D OpenOffice is to Microsoft, but it is very difficult for them to do B anything, partly because it is difficult to make the employees of E Microsoft understand the size of the treat without making Linux look  - more creditable in the eyes of the customers.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:23:34 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft, Message-ID: <41D109E6.382E1285@teksavvy.com>   Dave Froble wrote:T > Then there are some who will never want to use any Unix OS, which is all Linux is.  J Linux has a few "session managers" (KDE, GNOME for instance) that make theJ user  oblivious of the Unix engine underneath. You can invoke applicationsK without having to know obscure unix switches or commands. Desktop users can F live without using the command line. In fact, you could do that on VMSW workstations back when they had modern (by that time's standards) desktop applications.   J And in terms of using Linux as a server, the fact that unix has a far moreH powerful scripting language than Windows is a huge advantage, as well as= better TCPIP tools makes it a far better server than windows.   K Also remember that IT is a trendy thing. IT managers read about Linux being J great and decide their own shop has to go Linux or fear being left behind.N Once Linux gains sufficient momentum, it will bring with it millions of docile! sheep who just follow the trends.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:50:46 +0100 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft- Message-ID: <cqr3b7$1ers$1@news.cybercity.dk>    Dave Froble wrote: > Karsten Nyblad wrote:  >  >> Dave Froble wrote:  >> >>> JF Mezei wrote:  >>> H >>>> However, in 4 years, the Microsoft market share may be on a steady  >>>> decline, inJ >>>> which case, monopoly legal actions may no longer really be necessary  >>>> or give@ >>>> politicians an image of them fighting to protect consumers. >>>> >>> J >>> I really wouldn't count on that.  Too many applications for windows.  H >>> I've been told too many times that the windows user interface is so H >>> well known, and easy to learn, and any new hires would already know H >>> how to use windows.  Not really universally true.  So what?  If the J >>> decision makers have already made their decision, they will refuse to % >>> be affected by facts and reality.  >>>  >>> Dave >>> I >> At current Linux has a market share of about 10% on servers and 3% on  I >> desktops.  Both market shares seems to be growing about 25% per year.  H >> It is reasonable to declare victory when Linux has a market share of F >> 50%.  Assuming that Linux's market share continues to grow 25% per J >> year Linus will have 50% market in something like 2010 and 2015 on the & >> servers and desktops, respectively. >  > & > That's one hell of a big assumption! > G > There are also historical precedents for markets seeing rapid growth  K > until the market is full.  You're assuming that Linux is for everybody.   K > What if it's just for say 10% (or whatever %) of the market, and when it  # > reaches that point, growth stops?   F Linux as an operating system is good enough for the desktop and small G servers.  There is a lack of applications (Doesn't that sound familiar  I to VMS users.)  I do not see any blocks that can keep Linux from winning  L bigger and bigger market share as the applications become better and better.  J > As long as Microsoft doesn't piss off too many people, and their office F > automation products please the majority of users, that's what those  > users will stay with.   G Microsoft Office costs real money.  I do not want to spend hundreds of  A dollars just to get an office suite on my private PC, when I can  G download one for free.  You are assuming that people are always making  I sound economic decisions, but in the public sector it is often difficult  I to get even small investments through, while spending the employees time  H is no problem.  A major Copenhagen hospital changed from Wordperfect to H Word because Microsoft discounted word so that it was much cheaper than D Wordperfect.  However, the costs of retraining were many times what H Wordperfect wanted.  It is very likely that the public sector in Europe F will start changing to OpenOffice and Linux.  They need a few success , stories, but if they come, they will change.  K > Then there are some who will never want to use any Unix OS, which is all   > Linux is.   H There are also many who hate Microsoft, yet they use Windows because of I lack of choice.  Some will try to stay on Windows for a very long period  C of time, but when the majority have changed, the rest will have to  D follow.  I think, it is only a small number of geeks, who will base  their decisions on such biases.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:03:50 +0100 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft- Message-ID: <cqr43l$1ffi$1@news.cybercity.dk>    Stanley F. Quayle wrote:G >>[...] read Clayton M. Christensen:  "The Innovator's  Dilemma." [...] H >>when new products using disruptive technologies enter a market and theE >>new product does not meet the main customer groups needs, has a low G >>gross margin and the potential market is little. When the new product @ >>becomes better, it pushes the old products out of the market.  >  > H > Linux is not a "disruptive technology" -- it's mostly Unix, which has D > been around forever (in computer terms).  I do see it pushing out , > other Unixes, but that's not "disruptive".  D Linux is produced in a novel way and it is marketed in a novel way. & That makes is a disruptive technology.  H > Let's make STABILITY the new "disruptive technology".  Let's not sell D > the 20+ year track record -- that's old news no one wants to hear. > H > Sell stability as if it's NEW, and people will begin to take notice.  F > If not now, when their Winboxes crash.  And that's just a matter of 	 > time...   G Most PHBes do not care about stability.  They should, because the lack  G of stability on Windows is costing their organizations $$$$$, but they  G don't, and I think, we cannot make them change their mind.  I was once  B told to implement a system were high availability was required on  Windows 3.5.1.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 05:53:14 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft( Message-ID: <opsjp0u0ylzgicya@hyrrokkin>  K On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:43:37 +0100, Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam>    wrote:  L > If you ask Christensen why Digital lost, he will not tell the story told  G > by the VMS fans in c.o.v.  He would tell you the story of a company   I > having trouble competing on price with companies like Sun, Apollo and   J > later on with PC companies.  He would claim that Digital never learned  L > to be lean and mean enough to competitive.  He will tell you about small  I > companies that started growing at the same time, Digital was the Wall    > Street darling. G >   Digital had better products at higher prices, but the competitors   ? > products were good enough to meet the needs om the customers.   K IBM does not seem to fit the model.  They do not compete on price.  Remeber G when they thought they were getting into the copier business, Xerox had K essentially three models, of increasing sophistication.  What IBM did was    toH offer likewise three models, each offering better performance than the   Xerox K counterpart.  Digital's problem and the legacy perhaps carries on is that    itF regarded itself as a hardware company, not as a purveyor of solutions.   --  C Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 05:56:59 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft( Message-ID: <opsjp009ttzgicya@hyrrokkin>  K On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:03:50 +0100, Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam>    wrote:   > Stanley F. Quayle wrote:I >>> [...] read Clayton M. Christensen:  "The Innovator's  Dilemma." [...] J >>> when new products using disruptive technologies enter a market and theG >>> new product does not meet the main customer groups needs, has a low I >>> gross margin and the potential market is little. When the new product A >>> becomes better, it pushes the old products out of the market. L >>   Linux is not a "disruptive technology" -- it's mostly Unix, which has  L >> been around forever (in computer terms).  I do see it pushing out other  ' >> Unixes, but that's not "disruptive".  > L > Linux is produced in a novel way and it is marketed in a novel way. That  # > makes is a disruptive technology.  > J >> Let's make STABILITY the new "disruptive technology".  Let's not sell  E >> the 20+ year track record -- that's old news no one wants to hear. K >>  Sell stability as if it's NEW, and people will begin to take notice.    H >> If not now, when their Winboxes crash.  And that's just a matter of  
 >> time... > J > Most PHBes do not care about stability.  They should, because the lack  J > of stability on Windows is costing their organizations $$$$$, but they  J > don't, and I think, we cannot make them change their mind.  I was once  E > told to implement a system were high availability was required on    > Windows 3.5.1.H If IBM owned VMS the way they would market stability would be to the CEOG in such a way that if the computers crashed the CIO would lose his job.      --  C Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:48:14 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft, Message-ID: <41D19C5E.2090407@tsoft-inc.com>   JF Mezei wrote:     O > On the desktop, there are quite a few pilot projects around (inclusing a huge F > one at AT&T) and if a couple fo those pan out with some very visibelP > corporation switching from windows desktops to either mac or linux, it will beP > a big blow to Microsoft because all of a sudden, the very reasons that broughtO > so many companies to microsoft ("be compatible") will force many companies to O > switch to Linux/MAC to be compatible with their trading partners. If the ball 2 > gets rolling, it could start to move quite fast.    M That square ball will not roll as long as MS Office retains it's users.  The  M issue will be compatibility, but it's compatibility with MS Office that will  H define what users do.  It really isn't about the OS, it's all about the 
 applications.   Q As an example, AT&T may be successful with internal documents, but when the vast  O majority of people they do business with cannot use documents from AT&T, there  N will be disruption.  I doubt that AT&T will be able to force all it's trading F partners to convert to Linux.  It will be AT&T that will be disrupted.   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:53:29 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft, Message-ID: <41D19D99.9000009@tsoft-inc.com>   JF Mezei wrote:    > Dave Froble wrote: > T >>Then there are some who will never want to use any Unix OS, which is all Linux is. >> > L > Linux has a few "session managers" (KDE, GNOME for instance) that make theL > user  oblivious of the Unix engine underneath. You can invoke applicationsM > without having to know obscure unix switches or commands. Desktop users can H > live without using the command line. In fact, you could do that on VMSY > workstations back when they had modern (by that time's standards) desktop applications.  > L > And in terms of using Linux as a server, the fact that unix has a far moreJ > powerful scripting language than Windows is a huge advantage, as well as? > better TCPIP tools makes it a far better server than windows.  > M > Also remember that IT is a trendy thing. IT managers read about Linux being L > great and decide their own shop has to go Linux or fear being left behind.P > Once Linux gains sufficient momentum, it will bring with it millions of docile# > sheep who just follow the trends.  >   N So what is Free BSD and such?  Why haven't those products done what the Linux  proponents claim will happen?   O Yes, I have seen stupid decisions and hugh waste of money, but I'll still ask,  R who is going to pay all those sheep that aren't doing anything but a lateral move?   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:56:29 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 0 Subject: Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft, Message-ID: <41D19E4D.5020300@tsoft-inc.com>   Karsten Nyblad wrote:   < > but when the majority have changed, the rest will have to 	 > follow.     N So, VMS becomes free, and the rest will have to follow?  Somehow I just don't  think it's that simple.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:17:50 -0500 < From: "Peter Weaver" <WeaverConsultingServices@sympatico.ca> Subject: Re: HP exodus to Intel , Message-ID: <33dmahF3v696bU1@individual.net>   Keith Parris wrote:  >...G > The bulk of the VAX base has successfully migrated to Alpha by now. I G > rarely see a VAX system in serious use at customer sites I visit now.  >...  H I'm glad that my customers are not the same as your customers. I talk toD people all the time where VAX/VMS is a critical part of the company.E Part of the acceptance test my latest customer planned for CHARON-VAX B was to have 500 users on at one time since that was what their oldH hardware VAX could handle. If that is not serious use then I do not know* what is. (BTW: CHARON-VAX passed the test)   --   Peter Weaver Weaver Consulting Services Inc.  Canadian VAR for CHARON-VAX  www.weaverconsulting.ca    ------------------------------    Date: 28 Dec 2004 09:05:39 -0800$ From: "Ed Wilts" <ewilts@ewilts.org>2 Subject: Re: Legato vs VMS Backup -- Recover SpeedC Message-ID: <1104253539.959401.322060@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>    Richard B. Gilbert wrote: F > The problem with Netbackup for disaster recovery is that, before you can G > recover your VMS system, you must first recover your Netbackup server   E > and, second, you must install  a Netbackup client.  All this before  you 7 > can even start restoring the rest of your VMS System!   G In larger multi-platform organizations, restoring a NetBackup server is F a matter of policy anyway.  In fact, it will be much faster to restore? exactly one backup system than the half dozen or more that some A companies use.  Installing NetBackup isn't hard - a basic restore G environment consists of a couple of executables and command procedures.   F > If you use VMS Backup, Sungard (or whoever you use) gives you a bootE > disk  which you use to boot the system.  You stick your backup tape  in a > drive and start restoring.  B And Sungard, or whoever, could easily have a CD with the NetBackupC pieces on them that you can install in a few minutes.  While you're B getting your act together declaring your disaster, they'd have the install completed.  A > The other not nice thing about Netbackup is that, when a backup  fails,G > it returns success!!  I not talking about Backup just encountering an   C > error backing up a particular file, I'm talking about a drop-dead  halt!   F Not on my system it doesn't.  Every error has been reported correctly. Retries are properly handled.   C > I would not use Netbackup for anything I would have to recover in  case > of a disaster!  F I'm guessing that many of you know I'm a long-time VMS admin and bigotG (I've got my Raxco OpenVMS BIGOT poster in my cube) - going back to the C blue wall and VMS 2.4 when PIP was still around.  I've used several F backup systems and Netbackup is by far the best for me, and believe meB when I tell you that I was quite paranoid about trusting any of myF backups to anything other than good old VMS Backup.  Andy ("ConsultantE and Museum Piece" on his business card) and crew did a great job with B VMS Backup, but in many cases it just plain sucks when it comes toD performance and I've had serious reliability problems with not beingF able to restore data after it was written.  I'm currently backing up aF terabyte or so and can back it up over the network in less time than ID could with 4 local DLT8000 transports.  Restores are done in minutesA instead of hours - finding a tape the old fashioned way (what VMS A Backup catalog?) is now handled nicely in the Netbackup world and C single-file restores dropped from a day-long procedure to typically E under 15 minutes (assuming the tape is onsite in my robot).  Tapesys, F with its catalog on top of VMS Backup tapes, did a good job of findingE the tape that the files needed to come from, but sequentially reading E through tapes containing millions of tiny files was just too painful.   = Alan Fay and crew have done a superb job with Netbackup and I 0 definitely trust it to back up my critical data. .../Ed mailto:ewilts@ewilts.org   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:44:27 -0500 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>   Subject: Need UNIX clarification: Message-ID: <BbfAd.21823$Tn1.735381@news20.bellglobal.com>  L Our shop spends 95% of our time developing/maintaining OpenVMS software for J an internal application and ~5% of our time doing UNIX system admin work. K We've run into problems from time-to-time where a single application (DHCP  J for example) will seem consume too many resources which resulted in PANIC 4 messages at the console of one of our Solaris boxes.  M When we talked to the system vendor for this particular application, we were  J told the following "most UNIX operating systems are single threaded so we G should invest in a multi-blade solution where a web server runs on one  F blade, DHCP on a second, Oracle on a third, and so on". When you hear J something like this, you don't know if it's true or whether some salesman + trying to sell you more hardware (or both).   I p.s. we solved our problem by moving the DHCP function to an old AS-2100  M sitting in the back room and it has been happily running for over a year now  G without a peep (currently serving up 150,000 address from a 50 segment   pool).  	 * * * * *   G So here's my question. Is it true that most flavors of UNIX are single  % threaded? Is LINUX? Is HP-UX? Is AIX? L I was lead to believe that Tru64 was multi-threaded and this was one reason E why HP couldn't move AdvFs and TruCluster support from Tru64 into HP.   
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.9 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html     ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:12:23 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> $ Subject: Re: Need UNIX clarification( Message-ID: <opsjp7ax0rzgicya@hyrrokkin>  G On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:44:27 -0500, Neil Rieck <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>    wrote:   > * * * * * H > So here's my question. Is it true that most flavors of UNIX are single' > threaded? Is LINUX? Is HP-UX? Is AIX? H > I was lead to believe that Tru64 was multi-threaded and this was one   > reasonG > why HP couldn't move AdvFs and TruCluster support from Tru64 into HP.   I No, most have supported posix threads for 10 years,  whether applications " exploit them is a different issue.   --  C Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:33:20 GMT 5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger) 3 Subject: Re: Older StorageWorks Parts Not Available L Message-ID: <rdeininger-2812040833180001@user-uinj0d9.dialup.mindspring.com>  N In article <41D0DF00.D14B76C5@comcast.net>, djesysno@spam.earthlink.net wrote: ...   G >Well, here's an update. I'm told - by my Silver TAM - that this is not H >just local to older SW gear, it's HP-wide. I'm told by my local supportF >people that HP has outsourced their parts delivery to UPS. That meansG >"standard" delivery is 5 to seven business days (breaches most service D >contracts, bronze and above), expedited delivery 36 to 48 hours and >same-day delivery is history.  I EVERYONE who gets burned by this delivery mechanism needs to be sure that D EVERY communication with HP, written or verbal, includes the phrase,J "HP is currently in violation of the service contract with our company" asC long as the problem persists.  And loudly demand $$$ back.  If HP's J failure to deliver causes downtime and incremental costs to your business,F ask HP to make up the lost $$$.  And keep track of all these incidents; when you are negotiating the discount on your next renewal.     H >Guess HP is getting out of the hardware business - and the VMS business >- in a serious way.  H It sounds to me like HP is experimenting with a "cost-reduced" mechanismI for spare parts stocking and delivery.  They are not the first company to J outsource this work, but they may be doing it worse than most.  And HP mayG be the deafest large company in business today, so the people in charge J won't notice the problem until is has started to cost them $$$.  Once that* happens, they'll start to fix the problem.  H I believe UPS stocks whatever spares HP provides, and ships according toI HP's instructions.  That's been the case for some time.  UPS is certainly G capable of shipping stuff quickly, if they have it in stock, so there's J nothing wrong with this idea on the surface.  I guess someone(s) at HP hasG recently botched the inventory planning for a number of popular parts.  A That probably has little or nothing to do with the outsourcing of E warehousing, packing, and shipping to UPS.  Moke likely, some fool(s) D thought they could save a lot of money by reducing inventory levels.  H This is hardly equivalent to getting out of the hardware business.  LotsB of hardware work happening all the time in HP.  But, if UPS startsI designing HP's servers, you might want to watch out for chunks of falling  sky.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 09:39:21 GMT / From: "Hans Jivesten" <hans.jivesten@telia.com> 3 Subject: Re: pscp, psftp problem with MULTINET V5.0 3 Message-ID: <dhbyd.11778$d5.102287@newsb.telia.net>    Thanks Martin!  9 Did you have to configure SSH in any way to have it work?   
 What's plink?    b r,
 Hans Jivesten   < "Martin Vorlaender" <mv@pdv-systeme.de> skrev i meddelandet & news:32snesF3q9gkfU1@individual.net...4 > "Hans Jivesten" <hans.jivesten@telia.com> wrote...K >> As I had problems running pscp and psftp from my PC to get files from my I >> Hobbyist OpneVMS running TCIP Services 5.4 I changed to Multinet v5.0.  >>C >> This was even worse. Now I can't even do pscp -ls to list files.  >>I >> I get no errors or warnings when running pscp or psftp they just don't  >> transfer anything.  >> >> PuTTY works fine though.  >> >> Any thoughts, anyone? >  > Hmmm, works for me:  >  > C:\> pscp -V > pscp: Release 0.56 >  > C:\> pscp -ls mv@vmssupport: > mv@vmssupport's password:  > Listing directory . H > -rwxr-x---   1 MV                          632 Nov 10 16:00 decwSM.LOGH > -rwxr-x---   1 MV                         1912 Jul 27 12:13 edtini.edtG > -rwxr-x---   1 MV                          884 Jul 27 12:14 login.com F > drwxr-x--x   1 MV                          512 Jul 27 12:37 projekteB > drw-------   1 MV                          512 Aug 31 16:50 ssh2= > -rwxr-x---   1 MV                         6144 Nov 10 16:01  > vuePROFILE.VUEdat  > - > C:\> plink vmssupport -l mv mu show/version  > mv@vmssupport's password:  >  > $ Set NoOn1 > $ VERIFY = F$VERIFY(F$TRNLNM("SYLOGIN_VERIFY"))  > J > Process Software MultiNet V5.0 Rev A-X, AlphaStation 250 4/266, OpenVMS  > AXP  > V7.3-2 >  > C:\> >  >  > cu, 	 >  Martin  > --  B >                           | Martin Vorlaender  |  OpenVMS rules!5 > UNIX is user friendly.    | work: mv@pdv-systeme.de H > It's just selective about |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/< > who its friends are.      | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de >  >    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2004 23:08:01 -0800/ From: stuie_norris@yahoo.com.au (Stuart Norris) ! Subject: TeX / LaTeX for Open VMS = Message-ID: <51262235.0412272308.28d80841@posting.google.com>    Hi All,   B I was wondering what is the latest available version for Open VMS.   The latest I can see is 1997.   H I am after a later version that include postscript for such as MathTime.   Thanks   Stuart   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:47:50 -0500 < From: "Peter Weaver" <WeaverConsultingServices@sympatico.ca>$ Subject: Re: Time to revive Emerald?, Message-ID: <33dki8F3uqc5vU1@individual.net>   Dave Froble wrote: > David J Dachtera wrote:  >...F >> What happens when your Charon-VAX process GPF's or experiences some2 >> other fault? Your "VAX" disappears, doesn't it? >>D >> Other than the odd spurious reset, I've never seen that on either2 >> VAX or Alpha (the real thing, not an emulator). >  > ! > Have you seen it on Charon VAX?  > ...   D I have never seen CHARON-VAX disappear due to a Windows GPF or BSOD.   --   Peter Weaver Weaver Consulting Services Inc.  Canadian VAR for CHARON-VAX  www.weaverconsulting.ca    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:31:49 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>$ Subject: Re: Time to revive Emerald?+ Message-ID: <41D1A695.128391A2@comcast.net>    Peter Weaver wrote:  >  > Dave Froble wrote: > > David J Dachtera wrote:  > >...H > >> What happens when your Charon-VAX process GPF's or experiences some4 > >> other fault? Your "VAX" disappears, doesn't it? > >>F > >> Other than the odd spurious reset, I've never seen that on either4 > >> VAX or Alpha (the real thing, not an emulator). > >  > > # > > Have you seen it on Charon VAX?  > > ...  > F > I have never seen CHARON-VAX disappear due to a Windows GPF or BSOD.  F Then, let's look at that question from another angle: has the platformG under your Charon-VAX ever experienced a BSOD while Charon was running?   D First guess time, I'd say no. WhineBloze is deceptively stable whileH doing very little. Many is the time I've walked up to my wife's comupterC (W/95-OSR2) happily running the 3D-pipes screen saver for literally G weeks on end (she's not a big computer user), touched the mouse and had  it lock up tight.   D Charon-VAX on WhineBloze is o.k. for non-critical uses, IMO, but for@ mission critical implementation, it needs to evolve into its own= operating environment - no underlying o.s. to cause problems.    --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:04:41 -0500 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>+ Subject: Re: TruCluster/AdvFS open-sourced? = Message-ID: <u8SdnZAD5rEXmEzcRVn-gw@metrocastcablevision.com>s   Bob Koehler wrote:   ...   I >    DEC and Compaq have already proved that Tru64 (digital UNIX, OSF/1)  F >    doesn't sell.  It may be no fault of Tru64, and totally the faultE >    of bad marketing, but the record is there.  That failure was why 7 >    Curly started talking to Carly in the first place.i  B My, the revisionists haven't even yet given up.  Time to set them  straight again, I guess.  G While Tru64 had not achieved the market penetration of Solaris, HP-UX,  G or AIX, with annual system revenues of about $3 billion it had reached sF about 1/3 their size before the plug was pulled - not exactly chicken D feed.  And it was closing the remaining gap briskly (reaching a 30% & annual growth rate at the end of Y2K).  H So suggesting that Tru64 "just didn't sell" is even more ludicrous than F suggesting the same thing about VMS - logic right on par with that of - highly successful CEOs like Curly and GQ Bob.-   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:59:09 -0000.6 From: "Alex Daniels" <AlexNoSpamDaniels@themail.co.uk> Subject: Re: WHOIS 1.6 updated6 Message-ID: <41d1205f$0$15207$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message& news:41D11D0D.F02DB013@teksavvy.com...6 > Alex Daniels wrote more complaints about my utility: >rD > I had written a long technical reply to your points explaining the >differencesK > between bind and whois. I decided it just wasn't worth responding to you.r >It L > is you who needs to learn about whois. If fact, you have really put me offE > releasing any freeware for VMS anymore. I was about to publish an X  >utility tosI > browse/edit library files. Not sure it is worth the insults I will get.p  ? I am more than aware of the differences between BIND and whois.   F I suggest it is you that needs some education on different root serverL networks, specifically that there other TLD's in non-ICANN root servers thatL are not covered in your product. Your whois does not query the whois servers for these TLDs.n  G As for your other comments, I suggest you think carefully before FUDingeK other peoples products and perhaps you also need to learn to take criticismtJ of your own products, after all you seem only too happy to dish it out too HP.m   Alex   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:19:06 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) Subject: Re: WHOIS 1.6 updated6 Message-ID: <00A3D014.740834E4@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  \ In article <41D11D0D.F02DB013@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:5 >Alex Daniels wrote more complaints about my utility:a >sO >I had written a long technical reply to your points explaining the differenceshM >between bind and whois. I decided it just wasn't worth responding to you. It K >is you who needs to learn about whois. If fact, you have really put me offiO >releasing any freeware for VMS anymore. I was about to publish an X utility totH >browse/edit library files. Not sure it is worth the insults I will get.  N Oh, jeeze, JF, don't let one unpleasant response put you off from contributing to the VMS user community.     -- Alanr   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:11:33 -0600o* From: Michael Clark <MClark@Nemschoff.com>Y Subject: RE: [SPAM] - Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft - Bayesian F	ilter detectedsQ Message-ID: <A2A28DB6D52E084783ACD6E6C6F5D7900274F9A1@EMAILSERVER2.nemschoff.com>t   > -----Original Message-----0 > From: Dave Froble [mailto:davef@tsoft-inc.com]+ > Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 11:48 AMe > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComkF > Subject: [SPAM] - Re: 497 million euro fine for Microsoft - Bayesian > Filter detected spam >  >  > JF Mezei wrote:  >  > @ > > On the desktop, there are quite a few pilot projects around  > (inclusing a hugenH > > one at AT&T) and if a couple fo those pan out with some very visibel> > > corporation switching from windows desktops to either mac  > or linux, it will be> > > a big blow to Microsoft because all of a sudden, the very  > reasons that brought@ > > so many companies to microsoft ("be compatible") will force  > many companies toh< > > switch to Linux/MAC to be compatible with their trading  > partners. If the ball 4 > > gets rolling, it could start to move quite fast. >  > > > That square ball will not roll as long as MS Office retains  > it's users.  The a> > issue will be compatibility, but it's compatibility with MS  > Office that will w@ > define what users do.  It really isn't about the OS, it's all  > about the  > applications.t > 6 > As an example, AT&T may be successful with internal  > documents, but when the vast  @ > majority of people they do business with cannot use documents  > from AT&T, there C? > will be disruption.  I doubt that AT&T will be able to force e > all it's trading  H > partners to convert to Linux.  It will be AT&T that will be disrupted.  F You can get around most of these things.  AbiWord opens MS format wordH documents and will save in MS format.  OpenOffice does the same for wordI and excel.  I often work with Micro$haft formatted documents in a FreeBSD  enviroment without any issues.    A CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This electronic transmission, including alleL attachments, is directed in confidence solely to the person(s) to whom it isL addressed, or an authorized recipient, and may not otherwise be distributed,L copied or disclosed. The contents of the transmission may also be subject toJ intellectual property rights and all such rights are expressly claimed andG are not waived. If you have received this transmission in error, pleaseeH notify the sender immediately by return electronic transmission and thenH immediately delete this transmission, including all attachments, without* copying, distributing or disclosing same.    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.721 ************************