0 INFO-VAX	Wed, 14 Jan 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 27      Contents:1 Re: 2 unrelated Q: Mozilla 1.6 and DS15 soundcard 1 Re: 2 unrelated Q: Mozilla 1.6 and DS15 soundcard  Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped...9 Re: Can't talk to KZPAC with Storageworks command console  DHCP/BOOTP/PXE under OPENVMS  Re: DHCP/BOOTP/PXE under OPENVMS  Re: DHCP/BOOTP/PXE under OPENVMSH Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressivelyH Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressivelyP Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressively into diP Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressively into diP Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressively into di Re: file and record formats  Re: file and record formats  Re: file and record formats  Re: file and record formats  Further questions on LD driver. # Re: Further questions on LD driver.  Re: HP FUDBusting  Re: HP FUDBusting  Re: HP FUDBusting  Re: HP FUDBusting  Re: HP FUDBusting 2 HP outsources Superdome manufacturing to SingaporeP Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to run OVP Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to ruP Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to ruP Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to ruP Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to ruP Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to ru3 Re: Modify the logical SYS$STARTUP, why or why not? 3 Re: Modify the logical SYS$STARTUP, why or why not? 3 Re: Non-WS Process Quotas not in Performance Manual 3 Re: Non-WS Process Quotas not in Performance Manual / OFF TOPIC:  Re: To all "patriotic" americans... * OpenVMS is high availabilty par excellence. Re: OpenVMS is high availabilty par excellence. Re: OpenVMS is high availabilty par excellenceP Re: Oracle Rdb on GS1280 with 7.3-2 exceeds 1 million transactions per minute usP Re: Oracle Rdb on GS1280 with 7.3-2 exceeds 1 million transactions per minute usP OT - English (UK) humor - (was Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of opP Re: OT - English (UK) humor - (was Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure oP Re: OT - English (UK) humor - (was Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure oP Re: OT - English (UK) humor - (was Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure o3 Re: Personal Workstation 500a/au hardware questions  Re: PowerStorm 300 & DS25  Re: PowerStorm 300 & DS25  Re: Purging NTP log ! SCO, Novell publish Unix disputes + Re: Silly Users with Password as "Password" @ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems@ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems Re: VAX architecture and Charon  Re: VAX architecture and Charon  Re: VAX architecture and Charon  Re: VAX architecture and Charon  Re: VAX architecture and Charon ! Re: VMS runs well on HP Superdome   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:00:37 +0100 ' From: JOUKJ <joukj@hrem.stm.tudelft.nl> : Subject: Re: 2 unrelated Q: Mozilla 1.6 and DS15 soundcard* Message-ID: <bu30fu$2q4$1@news.tudelft.nl>   Dirk Munk wrote:8 > Patrick MOREAU, CENA Athis, Tel: 01.69.57.68.40 wrote: > 
 >> Hi all, >>$ >> I have two (unrelated) questions: >>B >> Is a Mozilla 1.6 on VMS port planned at HP ?  The last Mozilla  >> available is  >> 1.5RC2 (working OK),  >  > > > The browser is working ok, mail has several very nasty bugs. > A When using DECWindows1.3 and Open3d some garphic-devices may hang H when reading newsgroups. The problem is the incomatibility of the "old" H Open3d and the new DECwindows. HP patched for my device my Open3D, so I  expect a patch soon.                  Jouk    ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 14:21:27 +0100K From: pmoreau@ath.cena.fr (Patrick MOREAU, CENA Athis, Tel: 01.69.57.68.40) : Subject: Re: 2 unrelated Q: Mozilla 1.6 and DS15 soundcard! Message-ID: <aFRUP7ZNAp0l@sinead>   S In article <bu1ahu$4lf$1@news4.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>, Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> writes:  [...] H > Yep, it seems there are simply not enough resourses (manpower) at VMS N > engineering to keep the Mozilla releases up to date. There even isn't a 1.5 N > final yet, so I guess it may be quite a while before we see any kind of 1.6 G > release. I don't think anyone (incl. engineering) is happy with this   >situation.   O Do you know if the work on a native VMS build system for Mozilla is finished ?     If I refer to D http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/ips/cswb/cswb_source.htmlD Mozilla build is made under a Posix environment (and very slow ...).   Patrick  --O =============================================================================== N pmoreau@ath.cena.fr  (CENA)      ______      ___   _          (Patrick MOREAU)4 moreau_p@decus.fr (DECUS)       / /   /     / /|  /|J CENA/Athis-Mons FRANCE         / /___/     / / | / |   __   __   __   __  N BP 205                        / /         / /  |/  |  |  | |__| |__  |__| |  |N 94542 ORLY AEROGARE CEDEX    / /   ::    / /       |  |__| | \  |__  |  | |__|N http://www.ath.cena.fr/~pmoreau/            http://www.multimania.com/pmoreau/O ===============================================================================    ------------------------------    Date: 13 Jan 2004 23:19:34 -0800. From: mistdragon@zdnetonebox.com (mist dragon)' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... = Message-ID: <7500353b.0401132319.77be8592@posting.google.com>   L > The first reason is that HP UX and VMS have been ported to IA64, and if I Q > understand correctly it will be a hell of a job to find another cpu for HP UX.  Q > Since VMS already was designed to be portable to another cpu, it will be a lot   > easier to do that. > R > The second reason is that HP has committed itself to sell IA64 cpu's, come what O > may. The contract with Intel seems to be so tight, that HP can't do anything  P > else then to go on with the IA64 even if it would proof to be almost suicidal.  D Or it may be, that if Intel drops itanium, HP will just keep runningF on current PA-RISC/Alpha and EOL them as planned and turn customers toD Linux as it is allready available on AMD64/IA32. HP-UX is wery closeC to Linux (as all unixes are) so they can port services if they like D (and have mostly already done) and VMS can run on Charon over Linux.  B Time of one-vendor OS's like HP-UX, VMS, AIX, SCO Unix, Windows is gone, hail the new Linux.    M    ------------------------------    Date: 13 Jan 2004 23:31:31 -0800. From: mistdragon@zdnetonebox.com (mist dragon)' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... = Message-ID: <7500353b.0401132331.2f87ab37@posting.google.com>   v keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) wrote in message news:<cf15391e.0401131647.1e60cdc5@posting.google.com>...] > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<4003A02E.23A91A6F@istop.com>...  > > the inferior iA64 thing. > G > Do you realize the AMD x86-64 architecture isn't even a true 64 bits? H > Yes, it has 64-bit registers, but its virtual address space is only 48H > bits. That is actually smaller than Madison's _physical_ address spaceG > of 50 bits. (Opteron has a 40-bit physical address space.) IA64 has a A > full 64-bit virtual address space. While x86-64 contains 64-bit H > extensions to x86-32, Itanium was designed for 64 bits from the ground > up.  > 4 > Integer registers: 16 for x86-64; 128 for Itanium. > > > Floating-point registers 8 for x86-64 (it's saddled with the@ > now-ancient x87 floating-point architecture); 128 for Itanium. >   F I do know this. Itanium is clearly technically superior in all aspects and it is next gen processor.   F The problem however is, that the market is not unfortunatelly based on; tech ideologies as would be preferable, but for application F availability and compatibility. PC's arrived around 82 and if you take@ any modern PC you see the same architecture there, only now moreA integrated and packed. There is a huge load of old technology and B restrictions on lower level and a clean table would definitelly beE good. Unfortunatelly Intel cleaned table too much and became arrogant C on thinking they are driving the market because they are Intel, not ; because they are making compatible hardware to mass market.   E Would the technical merits save the world, itanium would clearly be a E winner, but in current situation, it can only loose. AMD did a clever C move of keeping full 32bit compatibility and even faster speeds and B yet at the same time provided the minimum to go to 64 bit. Whether> that is truly 64 bit the same way as itanium, is irrelevant toE non-techies. To the majority of people 64 bit is double the 32bit and  thats the end of it.   M    ------------------------------    Date: 13 Jan 2004 23:12:45 -0800' From: icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson) ' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... = Message-ID: <734da31c.0401132312.55b80e80@posting.google.com>   [ JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<4004937D.1C2D8E2E@istop.com>...  > Rick Jones wrote: G > > 32-bit execution.  It is quite possible to have rather fast running ) > > 32-bit IPF code on HP-UX for example.  > M > Ok, I am puzzled. How would one generate 32 bit mode IA64 native code ? (or # > why would one do such a thing ?).   F 32-bit IPF code can be faster for example because 32-bit pointers takeA less space. If you look at the submitted SPEC benchmarks the last D couple of years you will see that some tests have been compiled with* 32-bit pointers on a variety of platforms.  C The vast majority of HP-UX and Solaris applications today are still F 32-bit, even if they run on a 64-bit CPU and 64-bit OS. (this does not) have much to do with performance though).    ------------------------------    Date: 13 Jan 2004 23:42:20 -0800. From: mistdragon@zdnetonebox.com (mist dragon)' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... = Message-ID: <7500353b.0401132342.558e3139@posting.google.com>   > > As usual when you post. Nothing new and what everyone knows.  4 Yet at the same time it shows I dont hype as some :)  H > Itanium and the mainstream AMD64 CPU's target different markets, so itF > is hardly surprising that there are more AMD64 shipped than Itanium., > Anyone believing something else is stupid. >  > /David  C I refer AMD64 as architecture. To be precise Athlon 64 is aiming to F consumer market, FX-51 to power users and Opteron to servers. Yet they? are all derivates of the same AMD64 architecture. Note that the B announcement said 500K AMD64, not 500K Athlon 64's, althought they( propably are mostly Athlons and FX-51's.  E When you rule desktop, its easy to move to servers. Thats why itanium E will not gain market. In high-end where its cornered, it is competing 8 against established market where current user contracts,F availabilility and lots of competition in sales are concentrating. ItsB only chance is the likes of HP that drop their current systems and& move to itanium, expanding its market.  C The question is can VMS save itanium ? It could end like Philips. I F recall a way back when we did consulting for Philips minicomputers andB sales asked customer that if he had heard of Philips, the customerD said 'yes, I have Philips hairdrier in home'. This happened, becauseE Philips did not advertice its products enough and sooner or later VMS ? could start to mean something else altogether on peoples minds.    M    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 03:36:04 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... ) Message-ID: <4004FF47.24353CC7@istop.com>    mist dragon wrote:F > Or it may be, that if Intel drops itanium, HP will just keep runningH > on current PA-RISC/Alpha and EOL them as planned and turn customers to2 > Linux as it is allready available on AMD64/IA32.  N Shirley, Carly gets "serviced" by Intel and Microsoft drones who make sure sheG is kept quite happy.  And Shirley the pillow talk includes Intel's true M intentions with the IA64. Shirley HP and Intel are cooperating to find a face # saving way out of the IA64 fiasco.    K The problem is that IA64 does have a few iterations already in the pipeline N and I suspect that Intel will deliver at least the next 1 or 2 targets. BeyondE that, I expect only speed bumps before the chip is quietly forgotten.   G When you consider the work that is supposedly going on to bring some of I Tru64's goodies to HP-UX, will HP decide it is worth preserving HP-UX and M porting it to the 64 bit 8086, or will HP want to transition its customers to F Linux ? (and perhaps build a version of Linus with the Tru64 goodies).    J HP would be extremnely stupid if it wasn't considering its options in caseM IA64 fails. On the other hand, if HP can generate as many sales of enterprise M systems as Digital did, then these sales would generate sufficient revenus to N pay Intel as a contractor to continue to develop IA64, just like Tru64 and VMSE sales were more than enough to pay for Alpha's continued development.   M The main difference being that Alphas was smartly designed, whereas IA64 is a K bloated design requiring more time to move ahead, epecially when one has to G wait for new compilers to take advantage of new features.  So IA64 as a M proprietary HP chip has 2 big drawbacks: its bloated design will cost more to J develop, and the outsourcing to Intel will mean that you have to pay Intel bigger dollars to do the work.  J It all hinges, in my opinion, on whether either AMD or Intel produce 8086sL with "enterprise" features. If not, then IA64 may live on at whatever price.L But if the 8086 gets the goodies, then there will really be no reason not toN port Tandem/VMS/HP-UX to the 8086 and HP can then built 8086 based superdomes,1 and fault tolerant systems with lockstep etc etc.     N What si certain though is that IA64 will not become a maisntream chip and willK remain a niche market chip. In terms of VMS, it means that it will be worse N off than on Alpha because at least on Alpha, it had the performance advantage.  N Hopefully one VMS engineer has been kidnapped, put into some basement and told> to evaluate the possibility of putting VMS on the 64 bit 8086.         > HP-UX is wery close E > to Linux (as all unixes are) so they can port services if they like F > (and have mostly already done) and VMS can run on Charon over Linux.  M The problem with this that each vendor will end up proprietarising Linux with H their own add-ons. So you'll end up with HP-UX based on Linux instead of. System 5 or BSD or (whatever HP-UX came from).  K BTW, IBM has a very interesting TV ad in the USA. It is about some orphaned K child  growing up all alone and turning out to be a genius. And at the very F end, the word "LINUX" appears on the screen, followed by the IBM logo.   AIX is probably dead too.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:41:20 +0000 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> ' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... 0 Message-ID: <bu3gu1$mm2$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Keith Parris wrote: ] > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<4003A02E.23A91A6F@istop.com>...  >  >>the inferior iA64 thing. >  > G > Do you realize the AMD x86-64 architecture isn't even a true 64 bits? H > Yes, it has 64-bit registers, but its virtual address space is only 48H > bits. That is actually smaller than Madison's _physical_ address spaceG > of 50 bits. (Opteron has a 40-bit physical address space.) IA64 has a A > full 64-bit virtual address space. While x86-64 contains 64-bit H > extensions to x86-32, Itanium was designed for 64 bits from the ground > up.   , Does any of this make any difference at all.  8 40 bit addressing will allow the Opteron to address moreA physical memory than is currently available in any microprocessor 
 based system.   ; The fact that Madison has 50 bit addressing and Opteron has 7 40 will make absolutely no difference at all to current  systems.  : You need to find a feature that matters Keith 40 bit vs 50  bit physical addressing doesn't.  = You have however found a feature that does matter, Opteron is : based on x86 Itanium isn't, Opteron has all of the current7 IA32 SW catalogue available to it Itanium has ~500 apps 9 for each OS it supports. Thats a feature that does matter ! but not in the way you hoped for.    > 4 > Integer registers: 16 for x86-64; 128 for Itanium. >   9 But Opteron Integer performance is stubbornly faster than 5 Itanium despite being saddled with 1/8 the registers.    1477 SPECint vs 1322  6 So you have found another feature that doesn't matter.  9 You should also have know that the measure was wortheless , because Itanium needs more registers anyway.  > > Floating-point registers 8 for x86-64 (it's saddled with the@ > now-ancient x87 floating-point architecture); 128 for Itanium. >   = Ahh finally you have found a feature that might matter though , it again may not be the number of registers.  7 The trouble is that this one feature thats positive for 4 Itanium doesn't actually matter to the vast majority$ of people who will buy your systems.  9 As ever a misplaced effort on your part has been rewarded  with a poke in the eye.    regards  Andrew Harrison G > If you look at the SPECfp2000 results at http://spec.org, all the top A > results, from HP, SGI, Bull, Dell, Supermicro, and ION Computer B > Systems, are with the Itanium 2.  The #1 top result is for an HPC > system with Itanium 2 (1.5 Ghz) at 2119. Power4+ (1.7 Ghz) is way E > behind at 1699, Pentium 4EE (3.2 Ghz) at 1516, Opteron (2.2 Ghz) at G > 1514, EV7 (1.15 Ghz in GS1280) at 1482, and SPARC (1.32 Ghz) at 1350.    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:12:05 GMT & From: jlsue <jefflsxxxz@sbcglobal.net>' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... 8 Message-ID: <ihja00pt2dhubtd61gt8ikffqfcfff6rin@4ax.com>  H On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:44:37 -0500, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote:     > N >But if IA64 will be restricted to low volume, high cost, niche market, singleK >source, and only a few customers (HP , SGI), then none of the reasons that L >justified the killing of Alpha to move to IA64 are valid. Alpha was just asK >viable as IA64 and already in the market, tested, and years ahead of IA64.   H So you're saying that it's not valid for HP to reduce 4 server platformsG (PA-RISC, IA32/Proliant, Alpha, MIPS) down to two (and eventually one)?    --- jls 0 The preceding message was personal opinion only.6 I do not speak in any authorized capacity for anyone,  and certainly not my employer.- (get rid of the xxxz in my address to e-mail)    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:19:08 +0000 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> ' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... 0 Message-ID: <bu3j4t$ndj$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Rick Jones wrote: R > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote: >  > F >>What on earth are you talking about Opteron is a mainstream CPU justF >>as Xeon or Xeon MP, you can use it to build 1-8 way workstations and, >>servers which is very much the mainstream. >  > C > While the Opteron 8XX CPU claims support for up to 8 CPUs without C > further logic, to date, I do not think anyone has announced 8 CPU  > systems.   >   : Rather like Itanium initally then, for a long period after6 Itanium was launched you were only able to get 2 and 4 way systems.  < Opteron has been available for rather less time than Itanium: and I have no doubt that you will see >4 way Opteron based systems.     Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:21:12 +0000 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> ' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... 0 Message-ID: <bu3j8p$ndj$2@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   JF Mezei wrote: * > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: > ? >>Humm Opteron is a mainstream AMD64 CPU and it very definitely ? >>targets the same market as Itanium. Anyone thinking otherwise  >>is stupid. >  > K > I disagree. AMD's 64 bit 8086s are aimed at low and mid range servers and K > workstations. IA64 is essentially limited to proprietary high end servers 5 > running proprietary OS (HP-UX, VMS and Tandem NSK).  > P > IA64 can forget about Linux and Windows since the market prefers commodity and< > industry standard hardware to run those operating systems.  C You may well be correct about IA64's drawbacks to Linux and Windows A customers however HP are clearly intent on developing and selling - IA64 based systems running Linux and Windows.    Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 08:00:06 -0800' From: icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson) ' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... = Message-ID: <734da31c.0401140800.397d43dc@posting.google.com>    Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu1eh4$1ct$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  > David Svensson wrote:  > > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu1359$qra$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  > >  > >>David Svensson wrote:  > >>x > >>>mistdragon@zdnetonebox.com (mist dragon) wrote in message news:<7500353b.0401122133.3e66f991@posting.google.com>... > >>>  > >>> Q > >>>>>So they claim to have shipped half a million chips. But shipped to whom ?   > >>>>K > >>>>Take a walk on local computer shops and malls and look at labels from C > >>>>ibm, hp etc. And then take the same walk looking for itanium.  > >>>>H > >>>>I could ask the same question - where did those 10k itaniums go ?  > >>>> > >>>>M  > >>>  > >>> A > >>>As usual when you post. Nothing new and what everyone knows.  > >>> K > >>>Itanium and the mainstream AMD64 CPU's target different markets, so it I > >>>is hardly surprising that there are more AMD64 shipped than Itanium. / > >>>Anyone believing something else is stupid.  > >>>  > >>>/David  > >>A > >>Humm Opteron is a mainstream AMD64 CPU and it very definitely A > >>targets the same market as Itanium. Anyone thinking otherwise  > >>is stupid. > >> > >>Regards  > >>Andrew Harrison  > >  > > G > > No, Opteron is not a mainstream CPU, Athlon 64 is, and it is pretty G > > expected that they have shipped that many Athlon 64's. On the other C > > hand, the figures I have seen for Opteron are much lower than I F > > expected, considering that they are much easier to sell because of5 > > it's x86 compatibility and it's pretty low price.  > >  > A > What on earth are you talking about Opteron is a mainstream CPU G > just as Xeon or Xeon MP, you can use it to build 1-8 way workstations 0 > and servers which is very much the mainstream. > > > Would you say that Xeon and Xeon MP arn't mainstream CPU's ? > H > > The point about stupid was for for those who might have thought thatC > > Itanium would sell better than AMD64. Which I hardly think many  > > believed and expected. > >  > A > Well the problem with that theory such that it is is that AMD64 B > does compete directly with Itanium heard of Deerfield. Its aimedD > at the 1-2 way 64 bit server market and 64 bit workstation market. > A > I agree with you in one sense it was stupid for anyone to think @ > that Itanium would sell better than AMD64, its more expensive,% > hotter and slower where it matters.  >   E It is currently expensive and hotter, but in my real world experience F with testing customer database setups, nothing beats Itanium today andF that matters. (this includes testing of all current CPU architectures)   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:39:57 +0000 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> ' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... 0 Message-ID: <bu3rct$qce$2@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David Svensson wrote:  > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu1eh4$1ct$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  >   G > It is currently expensive and hotter, but in my real world experience H > with testing customer database setups, nothing beats Itanium today andH > that matters. (this includes testing of all current CPU architectures)    G So you have tried an unspecified DBMS on a Power4+ P690, a USIII 1.2Ghz F SF Sun and a GS1280. You must have access to a great deal of expensive kit, congratulations.    Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:24:42 -0800% From: whohe@whoever.com (DL Phillips) ' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... = Message-ID: <af0dc2ea.0401140924.5229491d@posting.google.com>   [ JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<4004FF47.24353CC7@istop.com>...   P > Shirley, Carly gets "serviced" by Intel and Microsoft drones who make sure sheI > is kept quite happy.  And Shirley the pillow talk includes Intel's true O > intentions with the IA64. Shirley HP and Intel are cooperating to find a face % > saving way out of the IA64 fiasco.   >   D Who is this Shirley person who gets serviced with Carly and shares aE pillow with her and is cooperating with HP and Intel in this way? I'd  surely like to know!;:;-)))   M > BTW, IBM has a very interesting TV ad in the USA. It is about some orphaned M > child  growing up all alone and turning out to be a genius. And at the very H > end, the word "LINUX" appears on the screen, followed by the IBM logo. >   A IBM has had really great ad's running for a long time. The Little A Orphan LINUX ones are super. The "On Demand" ad's running now are F good, too. The "Connected" series before that was also good. IBM knows; marketing. They know their target audience. Very clever and  intelligent advertising.  D Microsoft's Office 2003 ad's are stupid. I think the message they'reD trying to convey is "Use Office 2003 and drive yourself crazy" -- atC least that's what I get out of it. It's supposed to be some kind of E sports thing, I guess. Microsoft knows marketing, too. They know that C idiot PHB's buy their stuff and us poor working slobs are forced to ! use it so that's who they target.   A HP's ad's are colorful and entertaining but they don't sell me on D anything. They mention some high profile users of their systems, butF they don't tell me what product they're selling. I guess, though, thatF if I was impressed enough to call HP and ask them to sell me somethingE like what they mentioned in their ad, they'd tell me that some of the E people they mention use VMS and that's what I should have, too. Don't  you surely think they would?  
   DL Phillips    ******************* E "I do not appologize for anything I've said which might have offended C any idiot who misinterpreted some perfectly innocent statement I've F made to be a slur of some kind directed towards whatever jackass groupD of people the bleeding-heart liberals have stuck up their butts this week."              WhoHe what said dat.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:33:13 GMT 9 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <my-last-name@stardotzko.dec.com> ' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... 3 Message-ID: <t3fNb.12308$UX3.8544@news.cpqcorp.net>   + "Dirk Munk" <munk@home.nl> wrote in message , news:bu1qtt$69i$1@news4.tilbu1.nb.home.nl...  L > very fast in 32 bit mode. That's one of the selling points Fred, in half a year< > or so they are running very fast and cheap in 64 bit mode. >   G I'll wager you that in a half year, the distribution will remain largly G unchanged.  In fact I'll wager that in 18 months it still will not have K substantially changed.  There is no volume driver for having every ISV that K has a 32-bit mainstream product to produce 64-bit versions - and that's not J just apps, but drivers.  The volume uProcessor will continue to be variousI and sundry Intel IA32 chips.  The minority of people who will buy the AMD J product to run something in 64-bit mode will be running Linux or somethingI specialized on Windows (and which they may end up dual booting 32-bit and  64-bit).  K No.  A change like this takes time - AND it has to have a compelling reason  for people to switch.    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:39:52 GMT 9 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <my-last-name@stardotzko.dec.com> ' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... 3 Message-ID: <I9fNb.12310$xU3.6621@news.cpqcorp.net>   7 "David Froble" <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote in message >   J > Similar to the exporting of jobs from the US, how long can Intel support their H > expensive 'ego' CPU if they're not pulling in bundles of cash from the 'breadD > and butter' desktop market?  I don't care how much money they have	 available L > now.  If they start losing money, the well will run dry at some time.  Dry wells " > won't continue to produce IA-64. >   I You are turning the world on it's head.  The R&D investments are done and K paid for.  I've heard no proof that Intel is losing money on IPF.  Intel is L *highly* profitable, and still maintains the vast majority of the uProcessorL market.  AMD on the other hand isn't the biggest, isn't the most financiallyJ stable, and has a lot less water in it's "well".  Your "ifs" are not based, on any evidence that it may actually happen.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:42:20 GMT & From: Rick Jones <foo@bar.baz.invalid>' Subject: Re: 500.000 AMD64's shipped... 3 Message-ID: <g4gNb.12318$n04.4246@news.cpqcorp.net>   P Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote: > Rick Jones wrote: D >> While the Opteron 8XX CPU claims support for up to 8 CPUs withoutD >> further logic, to date, I do not think anyone has announced 8 CPU >> systems.   D > Rather like Itanium initally then, for a long period after Itanium= > was launched you were only able to get 2 and 4 way systems.   A When the 1-2 CPU i2000 workstation was announced, and the 1-4 CPU C rx4610 was announced, there was also the oft-forgotten rx9610 which  went to 16 CPUs:  9 http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2001/010529a.html   
 rick jones --  H Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events.F these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)A feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com  but NOT BOTH...    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 20:50:28 +1100 U From: "Antony Wardle" <remove_clothes_antony.wardle@_remove_clothers_optusnet.com.au> B Subject: Re: Can't talk to KZPAC with Storageworks command console; Message-ID: <400510e4$0$4051$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>   F mcr swxcrmgr will talk to your ra230 controller, but usually you can'tC do to much except replace failed disks. Everything else you have to  do from the ARC prompt.M  2 Not exactly what you were after, but maybe a help.   kiwi    > "Malcolm Dunnett" <nothome@spammers.are.scum> wrote in message' news:Tzkf3zKM2IGv@malvm7.mala.bc.ca....e >.G >  I have install Storageworks command console version 2.2 on a Windows.G > 2000 system. I am able to manage HSG80 arrays with this software, but'E > it does not appear to have a client for Raid Array 230+ controllerseH > (KZPAC). I am able to talk to RA 230+ controllers with Command consoleE > 2.1 ( installed on a different system ), but it won't talk to HSGs.E >dE >  I saw a reference in a google search to downloading a RA200 clientCD > for command console 2.2 from the Storageworks web site, but as far4 > as I can determine, that website no longer exists. >aG >  Does anyone know if it's possible to talk to RA230+ controllers withiG > the newer version of command console, and if so where I might get they > client software from?f >g >  Thanks in advance.h >      ---n& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 8/01/2004   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:58:03 +0100P( From: Harald Pollak <h.pollak@ksg.co.at>% Subject: DHCP/BOOTP/PXE under OPENVMSo6 Message-ID: <pan.2004.01.14.07.58.00.910839@ksg.co.at>   Hy everybody!!!r  9 Is it possible to use an OpenVMS 7.3-2 as PXE-Bootserver.oF I think there is a dhcp-, bootp- and a tftp-server in the tcpip( is it
 called ucx? ) & but is the dhcp-server supportin PXE?    thanks r Harry    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:36:27 -0500s* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>) Subject: Re: DHCP/BOOTP/PXE under OPENVMS ) Message-ID: <40050D69.EC0CEFC8@istop.com>s   Harald Pollak wrote:; > Is it possible to use an OpenVMS 7.3-2 as PXE-Bootserver.wH > I think there is a dhcp-, bootp- and a tftp-server in the tcpip( is it > called ucx? )o' > but is the dhcp-server supportin PXE?e  N The DHCP server on VMS provided with the Tcpip Services comes from the defunct "Join" company. # It provides DHSP and BOOTP support.p  There is a separate TFTP server.  R The license is staill called "UCX", but the TCPIP stack is called TCPIP Sertvices.  @ As far as PXE, I have no idea what PXE is. Could you elaborate ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:45:24 +0100i( From: Harald Pollak <h.pollak@ksg.co.at>) Subject: Re: DHCP/BOOTP/PXE under OPENVMSi6 Message-ID: <pan.2004.01.14.13.45.20.672666@ksg.co.at>  4 Am Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:36:27 -0500 schrieb JF Mezei:   > Harald Pollak wrote:< >> Is it possible to use an OpenVMS 7.3-2 as PXE-Bootserver.I >> I think there is a dhcp-, bootp- and a tftp-server in the tcpip( is itu >> called ucx? )( >> but is the dhcp-server supportin PXE? > P > The DHCP server on VMS provided with the Tcpip Services comes from the defunct > "Join" company. % > It provides DHSP and BOOTP support.t" > There is a separate TFTP server. > T > The license is staill called "UCX", but the TCPIP stack is called TCPIP Sertvices. > B > As far as PXE, I have no idea what PXE is. Could you elaborate ?  G PXE is an enhancement for the DHCP for remote booting, i'm not sure butf ithink its part of PC99.  ( PXE means Preboot eXecution Environment.  : If you like to see more, take a look on the Specification:  7 http://www.pix.net/software/pxeboot/archive/pxespec.pdfc  
 best regards s Harry     h   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 12:16:00 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)hQ Subject: Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressivelyM3 Message-ID: <NlwvvSns0$FL@eisner.encompasserve.org>i   In article <bu3nd8$p3e$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: > 1 > Because of this it is aledged that SPARC became 3 > bi-endian to accomodate Intergraph who were doings > a WNT port to SPARC.  D    HP also announced bi-endian chips for HP-PARC, at about the rightC    time to consider doing a WNT port, but nobody ever heard of them     even starting on a WNT port.s  G    Does anyone know of a system actually using HP-PARC in little-endian     mode?   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:30:56 -0800M/ From: Greg Cagle <news@removethisgregcagle.com> Q Subject: Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressivelyC0 Message-ID: <100b2n1lp6kdua9@corp.supernews.com>  5 Bob Koehler said the following on 1/14/2004 10:16 AM:    > In article <bu3nd8$p3e$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: > 1 >>Because of this it is aledged that SPARC becamem3 >>bi-endian to accomodate Intergraph who were doingu >>a WNT port to SPARC. >  > F >    HP also announced bi-endian chips for HP-PARC, at about the rightE >    time to consider doing a WNT port, but nobody ever heard of them ! >    even starting on a WNT port.  > I >    Does anyone know of a system actually using HP-PARC in little-endianl
 >    mode? >   + I assume you're talking about PA-RISC here.r  ? If that's the case, there was an NT port to PA-RISC, but it wasi never productized.   - Greg -- r
 Greg Cagle gregc at gregcagle dot com   ------------------------------   Date: 14 Jan 2004 07:26:29 GMT2 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>Y Subject: Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressively into di 5 Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-u4VCogKy6ndn@localhost>e  E On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:42:11 UTC,   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:u  s > In article <nB21ceC0oeiu@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:.s > >In article <OFC9A649A6.0504AABE-ON85256E1A.00517BDB-85256E1A.0052495F@metso.com>, norm.raphael@metso.com writes:e > > K > >> A succession of surprise celebrity appearances and a spate of dramatic N > >> announcements kept Consumer Electronics Show (CES) attendees on the edgesF > >> of their seats during Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina's keynoteP > >> presentation late last week. Speaking before a packed Hilton Theater in LasK > >> Vegas, Fiorina unveiled a new digital music player, revealed an online/K > >> music alliance with Apple Computer, and weighed in on the online musico > >> piracy debate.. > > K > >   HP should license more technology from Apple.  Like a better GUI than= > >   any they're selling now. >  > M > ... and instead of dicking with Itanicum, they should port VMS to the PowerDM > PC.  Then Apple could license it for OS 11 (Oh, the return of the 11) and a/M > great GUI atop and we'd finally have VMS running on a quality bit of laptop  > hardware.   = Serious q. Does anybody know whether the PowerPC can operate   little-endian?   --   Cheers - Dave.   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:09:30 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)=Y Subject: Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressively into dir3 Message-ID: <aCuGUpMZq9GZ@eisner.encompasserve.org>:  j In article <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-u4VCogKy6ndn@localhost>, "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow> writes: > ? > Serious q. Does anybody know whether the PowerPC can operate   > little-endian?  D    Yes.  PowerPC is bi-endian.  IBM had OS/2 running on it in little!    endian mode, possibly WNT too.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:31:51 +0000oO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>TY Subject: Re: Faced with flagging PC sales,  HPand others are pushing aggressively into di 0 Message-ID: <bu3nd8$p3e$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Bob Koehler wrote:l > In article <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-u4VCogKy6ndn@localhost>, "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow> writes: > ? >>Serious q. Does anybody know whether the PowerPC can operate I >>little-endian? >  > F >    Yes.  PowerPC is bi-endian.  IBM had OS/2 running on it in little# >    endian mode, possibly WNT too.c  5 WNT was available but never took off and was dropped.i  4 PowerPC was bi-endian, AIX is big-endian and WNT was0 little-endian. There are significant issues with% porting WNT to big-endian processors.   / Because of this it is aledged that SPARC becamej1 bi-endian to accomodate Intergraph who were doing7 a WNT port to SPARC.   Regardsn Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:32:20 +0100.- From: "Martin Vorlaender" <mv@pdv-systeme.de>F$ Subject: Re: file and record formats8 Message-ID: <bu32b5$cocl5$1@ID-56200.news.uni-berlin.de>   Kaleb Pederson wrote: E > I'm hoping to find some good documentation on all the C/C++ OpenVMSiD > specifics, but have had a hard time trying to find anything really> > useful, although I've only been looking a couple of days now > off-and-on.  >  > help says: > D >             int open(const char *file_spec, int flags,...); (CEC C >             Extension) > F >        where the ...  represents optional file attribute arguments. G >        The file attribute arguments are the same as those used in the  >        creat function. >  > Looking up creat:f > @ >             int creat(const char *file_spec, mode_t mode,...);" >             (Compaq C Extension) > A >        where the ...  is an optional argument list of character ' >        strings of the following form:b > 0 >        "keyword = value",...,"keyword = value" > 5 >        Or in the case of "acc" or "err", this form:p >  >        "keyword" > F >        The keyword is an RMS field in the file access block (FAB) or> >        record access block (RAB), and the value is valid forE >        assignment to that field.  Some fields permit you to specifyoF >        more than one value. In these cases, the values are separated
 > by commas. b > 5 > I found the following once I knew what to look for:i > 6 > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/commercial/c/5763p021.html > 5 > Hopefully I can find more on the OpenVMS specifics.e  G If you're refering to the above, you'll find a more thorough definitioncD of the creat() keywords and their meaning (as well as RABs and FABs)? in the "OpenVMS Record Management Services Reference Manual" ate8 http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/731FINAL/4523/4523PRO.HTML   > I'm particularlyE > interested in some of the ACL functions but didn't see any in help.o  C ACL functions? I'm not aware of any routines in the C RTL that deal  with VMS access control lists.     cu,3   Martin -- :F   OpenVMS:                | Martin Vorlaender  |  VMS & WNT programmer3    The operating system   | work: mv@pdv-systeme.de2F    God runs the           |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/:    earth simulation on.   | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:47:04 +0100r- From: "Winfried Bergmann" <dummy@empuron.com>r$ Subject: Re: file and record formats9 Message-ID: <bu3335$cqdl7$2@ID-170759.news.uni-berlin.de>   @ "Kaleb Pederson" <kpederson@mail.ewu.edu> schrieb im Newsbeitrag, news:200401131605.38759.kpederson@ewu.edu...6 > On Tuesday 13 January 2004 02:02 pm, JF Mezei wrote: > [snip]K > > Ok, first of all, this doesn't look like C to me. This looks a lot morei
 > > like C++.e >oI > Yeah, I meant C++.  I was going to do it in C and then realized that itr had noH > getline equivalent, so switched to C++ and forgot to change my message back.c   what about gets or fgets?g   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:55:31 -0600 6 From: "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@mac.com.spamfooler>$ Subject: Re: file and record formatsT Message-ID: <craigberry-8AA6B5.08553114012004@dsl081-159-101.chi1.dsl.speakeasy.net>  2 In article <200401131220.36588.kpederson@ewu.edu>,/  Kaleb Pederson <kpederson@mail.ewu.edu> wrote:n  K > > How do you use a UNIX diff command on a VMS text file?  If you transfer L > > the text file to a UNIX box, the issue is how your file transfer programD > > treats it.  If you run the diff command on the VMS platform, theC > > issue is how your file access layer (the CRTL) treats the file.  > - > I have a port of Unix Diff that I got from:l >  > http://www.polarhome.com/vim/c > P > I tried running it on the files named above, and it failed miserably.  I also P > have some other programs that are expecting StreamLF files, that I would have P > hoped would work with the Variable Length files.  Apparently I'll either have O > to modify the port or use an FDL to make it an understandable format for the t > misc. programs I'm using.f     Try the one at  ; http://h71000.www7.hp.com/freeware/freeware50/gnudiffutils/r  G No promises, but there was some effort spent in trying to get it to do   the right thing on VMS.i   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 07:45:59 -0800l- From: Kaleb Pederson <kpederson@mail.ewu.edu> $ Subject: Re: file and record formats2 Message-ID: <200401140745.59319.kpederson@ewu.edu>  4 On Tuesday 13 January 2004 05:21 pm, JF Mezei wrote: > Kaleb Pederson wrote: K > > Yeah, I meant C++.  I was going to do it in C and then realized that itoI > > had no getline equivalent, so switched to C++ and forgot to change my0 > > message back.  >mI > fgets is the c function to read a line. Used in conjunction with fopen.d  N Cool. I never realized that it read in a line (probably because I usually use H C++).  I just kept thinking it was the same as reading in a string with  sprintf.  I > I am not familiar with the "instream in("filename");  construct in C++.   8 There's a good reference to the C++ stream libraries at I http://www.cplusplus.com/ref/iostream/, or check out one of Stroustrup's h book.h  G > I suggest you lookup its documentation it may reveal that it bypassesa< > standard RMS processing unless you specify something else. >AF > >             int open(const char *file_spec, int flags,...); (CEC C > >             Extension)  @ Actually, I was saying that it *did* work.  To be more specific:   these work:x   char tmp[1024];p ifstream in("filename"); in.getline(tmp,1024);y   string tmp;  ifstream in("filename"); getline(in,tmp);  < these conditionally work (and therefore conditionally fail):   char tmp[1024];  ifstream in("filename"); in.getline(tmp,1024,'\n');  
 string tmp ifstream in("filename"); getline(in,tmp,'\n');o  O The above two fail when the record is "variable length" as there is no newline n to be picked up.  " > The flags might looks like this: >,= > 	fopen(filenam,"w","ctx=rec","shr=get","rfm=var","rat=cr");g >l  L It's nice to see an example.  I did finally find some good documentation on 6 the HP site yesterday, so I'll use that in the future.  M > When you open an existing file, the "rfm=var" would not be needed since thehK > system knows what the file is internally. Note that by default, C creates > > streamlf files unless you specify you want VMS native files. >eM > One generally has to work hard to get the C RTL to bypass the RMS layer and L > access the raw data. Seems that you managed to get there without lifting a > finger :-)  G Specifying the delimiter seems pretty easy to me ;).  Before I started dN becoming familiar with OpenVMS, I had no clue that files weren't separated in 3 some way by line feeds.  Just my ignorance I guess.n   --Kaleb6   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:38:52 -0500e) From: "Scott Greig" <jsgreig@geminaq.com>n( Subject: Further questions on LD driver.8 Message-ID: <9EbNb.1120$c1.207038@news20.bellglobal.com>   Hello: The scenario is as follows:t  0 I installed VMS 7.3-1 (and patches) onto a DS10. System has 72GB disks.  + Installed LD from LD063 (VMS Freeware V5.0)h+ This replaced the SYS$LDDRIVER.EXE and .STBs2 files.  It also made the LD command use the LD.EXE image.  2 I made large (24GB) logical disks, and so far have0 only populated them with a max of 3.5GB of data.  - System has been running since October with noP crashes.  6 Is this a stable setup, or should I backup the logical6 disks, destroy the container files, install LD731 from5 the Freeware V6.0 disks, recreate the container filesi and restore the logical disks ?   3 Or, will installing LD731 and rebooting be enough -o or even necessary?   TIAd Scottu   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 16:11:46 +0100C From: vaxinf@chclu.chemie.uni-konstanz.de (Eberhard Heuser-Hofmann) , Subject: Re: Further questions on LD driver.- Message-ID: <40055c32$1@news.uni-konstanz.de>   F In article <9EbNb.1120$c1.207038@news20.bellglobal.com>, "Scott Greig" <jsgreig@geminaq.com> writes:- >Hello:- >The scenario is as follows: >:1 >I installed VMS 7.3-1 (and patches) onto a DS10.c >System has 72GB disks.n >a, >Installed LD from LD063 (VMS Freeware V5.0), >This replaced the SYS$LDDRIVER.EXE and .STB3 >files.  It also made the LD command use the LD.EXEe >image.o >s3 >I made large (24GB) logical disks, and so far haveo1 >only populated them with a max of 3.5GB of data.  >o. >System has been running since October with no	 >crashes.6 >i7 >Is this a stable setup, or should I backup the logicalr7 >disks, destroy the container files, install LD731 froma6 >the Freeware V6.0 disks, recreate the container files  >and restore the logical disks ? >a4 >Or, will installing LD731 and rebooting be enough - >or even necessary?s >- >TIA >Scott   Scott,  0 use the sys$lddriver from your OpenVMS 7.3-1 CD.I dir/date sys$ldr:sys$lddriver.exe (Creation date 18-JUL-2002 19:55:06.69)s   eberhard   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:50:14 GMTl& From: jlsue <jefflsxxxz@sbcglobal.net> Subject: Re: HP FUDBusting8 Message-ID: <m8ia00l3pbnhe2gormcpvb1db0aidp0mua@4ax.com>  7 On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:55:09 -0600, "David J. Dachtera"t- <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote:0   >Keith Parris wrote: >> s >> Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<btub0a$pil$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...< >> > Ohh dear. The Tru64 extensions to HP-UX have apparently; >> > slipped to 2005 and HP are apparently stopping sellinge >> > Tru64 in 2004.  >>  0 >> According to http://www.hp.com/go/tru64unix :3 >> "HP is fully committed to the Tru64 UNIX roadmaplE >> (http://h30097.www3.hp.com/unix/downloads/tru64_unix_roadmap.ppt), H >> delivering updates until at least 2006 with standard support at least >> until 2011. >dF >I know I've seen Sun's opportunistic ads in print. I think I even saw/ >one in a Time magazine in my dentist's office.e >8/ >...and hp's response is only available online.  > - >I wonder which one(s) got the most exposure?   E Hey, I've got an idea, why doesn't HP retroactively put it's print-ada6 rebuttal into those very same magazines?  Oh, wait....  K Sheesh, how often have you actually seen print ads that rebut a competitorso> ads?  It's not the best way to spend your advertising dollars.   --- jlsa0 The preceding message was personal opinion only.6 I do not speak in any authorized capacity for anyone,  and certainly not my employer.- (get rid of the xxxz in my address to e-mail)f   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:15:45 +0000 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>  Subject: Re: HP FUDBusting0 Message-ID: <bu3iuh$na0$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   jlsue wrote:9 > On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:55:09 -0600, "David J. Dachtera" / > <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote:- >>G >>I know I've seen Sun's opportunistic ads in print. I think I even sawb0 >>one in a Time magazine in my dentist's office. >>0 >>...and hp's response is only available online. >>. >>I wonder which one(s) got the most exposure? >  > G > Hey, I've got an idea, why doesn't HP retroactively put it's print-ad 8 > rebuttal into those very same magazines?  Oh, wait.... > M > Sheesh, how often have you actually seen print ads that rebut a competitorsk@ > ads?  It's not the best way to spend your advertising dollars. >   9 Well the alternative would be to actually advertise Tru64 9 and OpenVMS, that would establish that you are interestedd in people buying them etc etc.   Now how hard would that be ?   regardsa Andrew Harrison)   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:39:04 GMTt# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>  Subject: Re: HP FUDBustingH Message-ID: <cwcNb.22642$%wh.18987@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  ( Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: > jlsue wrote:: >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:55:09 -0600, "David J. Dachtera"0 >> <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote: >>>sE >>> I know I've seen Sun's opportunistic ads in print. I think I evenn6 >>> saw one in a Time magazine in my dentist's office. >>>r2 >>> ...and hp's response is only available online. >>> 0 >>> I wonder which one(s) got the most exposure? >> >>H >> Hey, I've got an idea, why doesn't HP retroactively put it's print-ad9 >> rebuttal into those very same magazines?  Oh, wait....h >>B >> Sheesh, how often have you actually seen print ads that rebut aD >> competitors ads?  It's not the best way to spend your advertising >> dollars.r >> >t; > Well the alternative would be to actually advertise Tru64n; > and OpenVMS, that would establish that you are interestedo  > in people buying them etc etc. >t > Now how hard would that be ?    . You are a sarcastic one aren't you Andrew. ;-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:56:22 +0000eO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>e Subject: Re: HP FUDBusting0 Message-ID: <bu3lan$o6s$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   John Smith wrote:d* > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: >  >>jlsue wrote: >>: >>>On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:55:09 -0600, "David J. Dachtera"0 >>><djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote: >>>rE >>>>I know I've seen Sun's opportunistic ads in print. I think I eveni6 >>>>saw one in a Time magazine in my dentist's office. >>>>2 >>>>...and hp's response is only available online. >>>>0 >>>>I wonder which one(s) got the most exposure? >>>( >>>,H >>>Hey, I've got an idea, why doesn't HP retroactively put it's print-ad9 >>>rebuttal into those very same magazines?  Oh, wait....d >>>tB >>>Sheesh, how often have you actually seen print ads that rebut aD >>>competitors ads?  It's not the best way to spend your advertising >>>dollars.l >>>  >>; >>Well the alternative would be to actually advertise Tru64e; >>and OpenVMS, that would establish that you are interested   >>in people buying them etc etc. >> >>Now how hard would that be ? >  >  > 0 > You are a sarcastic one aren't you Andrew. ;-) > 4 The pathos of it all amused me, there is poor old HP3 assailed by negative advertising from a competitor.s  2 Something HP never ever does themselves oh no sir.  3 What options does poor old HP have, respond in kindn/ now that would be a waste of advertising budgeto wouldn't it.  0 Or correct the impression that Tru64 and OpenVMS' are dead by doing positive advertising.s  9 Of course central to jlsues point is the implication thatn2 there is a Tru64 and OpenVMS advertising budget to waste.   Regardsm Andrew Harrison>   >    ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:15:03 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)  Subject: Re: HP FUDBusting3 Message-ID: <zThaQx$LQ0$I@eisner.encompasserve.org>k   In article <bu3iuh$na0$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes:; > Well the alternative would be to actually advertise Tru64o; > and OpenVMS, that would establish that you are interested'  > in people buying them etc etc.  <    Advertising Tru64 would be counter to its stated roadmap.:    Kind of like GM running up a bunch of ads for next 2005    Oldsmobiles./   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 04:40:54 -0800. From: fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br (Fabio Cardoso); Subject: HP outsources Superdome manufacturing to Singaporea= Message-ID: <f30679fb.0401140440.7497b202@posting.google.com>a   Clicka  ) http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13618x  = HEWLETT PACKARD yesterday confirmed it is to move some of its 2 manufacturing from the United States to Singapore.F According to Dow Jones, it will spend over $1 billion to refurbish its> manufacturing in the tiny city state, creating a number of new
 factories.     (...)   / Next step... OpenVMS Engineering to India ! :-)i   Regards    FC   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 02:42:55 -0800. From: fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br (Fabio Cardoso)Y Subject: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to run OVu= Message-ID: <f30679fb.0401140242.69f81d51@posting.google.com>n   Click   9 http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5140486.html?tag=nefd_topv      E Intel wants to remove price as a barrier to the acceptance of ItaniumiF servers, a goal that could allow the processor to become the company's5 primary server chip in the second half of the decade.   B The Santa Clara, Calif.-based chipmaker is working on chipsets andF other products and technologies that will make an Itanium-based serverD no more expensive than a similar machine powered by its Xeon chip byD 2007, said Mike Fister, senior vice president of the server products group at Intel.s  ; Because Itanium can provide more performance than Xeon, thetF elimination of the current, often substantial, price discrepancy couldC then permit Itanium to become Intel's principal server offering. IfrE successful, the strategy could allow Intel to begin to phase out Xeonn after 2006.c   (...)0 Regards4   FC   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:36:31 GMTs# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>oY Subject: Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to rusH Message-ID: <PtcNb.22623$%wh.19927@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>   Fabio Cardoso wrote: > Clickh >s; > http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5140486.html?tag=nefd_topd >  >t >tG > Intel wants to remove price as a barrier to the acceptance of ItaniumuH > servers, a goal that could allow the processor to become the company's7 > primary server chip in the second half of the decade.p >iD > The Santa Clara, Calif.-based chipmaker is working on chipsets andH > other products and technologies that will make an Itanium-based serverF > no more expensive than a similar machine powered by its Xeon chip byF > 2007, said Mike Fister, senior vice president of the server products > group at Intel.. >>= > Because Itanium can provide more performance than Xeon, thehH > elimination of the current, often substantial, price discrepancy couldE > then permit Itanium to become Intel's principal server offering. IfsG > successful, the strategy could allow Intel to begin to phase out Xeont
 > after 2006.     I Looks like EV79 will be needed after all....possibly even EV8 by the timetJ Intel meets its aggressive 1999 (oooops) , er...um... 2007 launch date for lower cost IA64 chipsy   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:33:35 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)eY Subject: Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to rut3 Message-ID: <ClB0LAsGLVxt@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  n In article <PtcNb.22623$%wh.19927@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes: > Fabio Cardoso wrote: >> Click >>< >> http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5140486.html?tag=nefd_top >> >> >>H >> Intel wants to remove price as a barrier to the acceptance of ItaniumI >> servers, a goal that could allow the processor to become the company'se8 >> primary server chip in the second half of the decade. >>E >> The Santa Clara, Calif.-based chipmaker is working on chipsets andeI >> other products and technologies that will make an Itanium-based server G >> no more expensive than a similar machine powered by its Xeon chip bycG >> 2007, said Mike Fister, senior vice president of the server productse >> group at Intel. >>> >> Because Itanium can provide more performance than Xeon, theI >> elimination of the current, often substantial, price discrepancy couldeF >> then permit Itanium to become Intel's principal server offering. IfH >> successful, the strategy could allow Intel to begin to phase out Xeon >> after 2006. >  > K > Looks like EV79 will be needed after all....possibly even EV8 by the timeiL > Intel meets its aggressive 1999 (oooops) , er...um... 2007 launch date for > lower cost IA64 chipsh >   5 	Actually, you are missing the mark.  Not surprising.e  A 	Keith in an earlier post mentioned that Itanium systems shippingcE 	(with production VMS I'm assuming) will average 30-40% cheaper than l? 	Alpha Systems.  That was expected.  But prices will be gettings 	far cheaper than that.-  7 	If you look here, you see that 8-way MCMs cost $375000r  F http://www.tpc.org/results/individual_results/IBM/IBMp690es_101703.pdf  ; 	If you click on an HP reference out there, you see Itaniums	 	pricing.t  E http://www.tpc.org/results/individual_results/HP/hp_tpcc_sd1.5_es.pdfs  + 	You see a 16 CPU cell board costs $275000.   < 	If you trip out to Dell, you see additional 2.8 GHz 2 MByte< 	Xeon CPUs cost about $4500.  That appears to where Intel isH 	headed with Itanium pricing.  Makes you wonder how much market pressure? 	Sun and IBM can sustain with UltraSparc and Power.  AMD 64-bitl, 	at the low-end and Itanium at the high-end.  ? 	Must be frightening NOT to go with Itanium or choose AMD as a  ; 	direction.  Because it is clear to me the high margins forpA 	high-end CPUs are going to be obliterated.  Making it impossible B 	to sustain in-house CPU design teams and attendent infrastructureG 	(count on it being much more of a loss center).  Surely SGI and Compaqs@ 	got the NDA that showed how much CPU pricing will be decreasing? 	and the side effects on their own CPU directions?  Sun puts one1 	a brave face for UltraSparc - but it's dead Jim.p  G 	The fact that Intel states Itanium will be no more expensive than Xeon16 	tells me it is headed towards commoditization, right?   				Robc   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:52:06 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)"Y Subject: Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to ruS3 Message-ID: <w2A33lQ5X+vD@eisner.encompasserve.org>o  a In article <ClB0LAsGLVxt@eisner.encompasserve.org>, young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:n  I > 	The fact that Intel states Itanium will be no more expensive than Xeonn8 > 	tells me it is headed towards commoditization, right?  B No, a commodity would be where there are multiple producers, but I6 believe Intel has applied for Itanium-related patents.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:22:38 -0500p* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>Y Subject: Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to run) Message-ID: <40052679.4BD6772F@istop.com>i   Fabio Cardoso wrote:H > other products and technologies that will make an Itanium-based serverF > no more expensive than a similar machine powered by its Xeon chip byF > 2007, said Mike Fister, senior vice president of the server products > group at Intel.b  N Perhaps too little too late. And that announcement lacks the all too important word "desktop".a  N 2007 is a long long time in the IT industry. I think that this is more of a PRN action to counter the apparent success of AMD's 8086 offerings. By 2007, it isL doubtful that Microsoft will have continued to bother with a IA64 version ofM Windows. (just like MS dumped PowerPc, MIPS and later Alpha version of NT duey to lack of sales)t    J I think that Intel underestimates the damage of its "no IA64 on desktops" K statement before Merced even came out, as well as the more recent statement/# about desktops not needing 64 bits.1    J IA64 will fail in the commodity industry standard market simply because it* isn't industry standard and incompatible.   J The other question is whether IA64 will have been able to follow Power andM even Sparc or whether delays, cost overruns etc will have caused IA64 to fall-. behind in an ever increasing performance gap.   L It is one thing to brag about improvements to IA64 that are in the pipeline,L but those have to be compared to what competitors will have on the market in the same time frame.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:12:45 +0000nO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>gY Subject: Re: Intel to chip away at Itanium prices <- or ... I want my cheap workst. to rua0 Message-ID: <bu3m9e$oka$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   John Smith wrote:  > Fabio Cardoso wrote: >  >>Clickm >>; >>http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5140486.html?tag=nefd_tope >> >> >>G >>Intel wants to remove price as a barrier to the acceptance of Itanium H >>servers, a goal that could allow the processor to become the company's7 >>primary server chip in the second half of the decade.t >>D >>The Santa Clara, Calif.-based chipmaker is working on chipsets andH >>other products and technologies that will make an Itanium-based serverF >>no more expensive than a similar machine powered by its Xeon chip byF >>2007, said Mike Fister, senior vice president of the server products >>group at Intel.e >>= >>Because Itanium can provide more performance than Xeon, the H >>elimination of the current, often substantial, price discrepancy couldE >>then permit Itanium to become Intel's principal server offering. IfgG >>successful, the strategy could allow Intel to begin to phase out Xeonp
 >>after 2006.c >  >  > K > Looks like EV79 will be needed after all....possibly even EV8 by the time-L > Intel meets its aggressive 1999 (oooops) , er...um... 2007 launch date for > lower cost IA64 chipsj >  > ? IDC have just downgraded their estimates for the total value of9 the Itanium market yet again.y  < Early on in the project/experiment/dissaster (you chose) IDC; were projecting a market of ~28 billion dollars for Itanium  based systems by 2007.  C Subsequent events led them to reduce this in a series of reductions-@ to $8.7 billion by 2007. IDC has now reduced this further to 7.5> billion for 2007 because of increased competition from AMD and other vendors.  = This suggests that even if choristers on this newsgroup thinkP< that AMD64 doesn't compete with Itanium that this view isn't shared by industry analysts.  : Even worse HP's EBU currently does ~$5.7 billion a year in< server revnues which is getting perilously close to the size: that people are expecting the entire Itanium market to be.  7 Or put another way Intel end up fabbing Itaniums for HPP and no one else.   Regardst Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:04:06 GMTe3 From: hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond).< Subject: Re: Modify the logical SYS$STARTUP, why or why not?3 Message-ID: <WLdNb.12296$sO3.5110@news.cpqcorp.net>l  E If the definition of SYS$STARTUP is changed, this will *NOT* be knownsJ to the upgade process when OpenVMS is next upgraded.  This may or may not F be a problem for the upgrade itself.  And it may or may not result in   problems on the upgraded system. -- sJ       Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale  FL  USAF           (hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 12:14:52 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)s< Subject: Re: Modify the logical SYS$STARTUP, why or why not?3 Message-ID: <z1OMHTQPI8GC@eisner.encompasserve.org>P  i In article <WLdNb.12296$sO3.5110@news.cpqcorp.net>, hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) writes:iG > If the definition of SYS$STARTUP is changed, this will *NOT* be knownuL > to the upgade process when OpenVMS is next upgraded.  This may or may not H > be a problem for the upgrade itself.  And it may or may not result in " > problems on the upgraded system.  
 Even on VAX ?:   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:37:24 +0800j, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>< Subject: Re: Non-WS Process Quotas not in Performance Manual- Message-ID: <8765fey4t7.fsf@prep.synonet.com>p  5 "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> writes:t  E > It was a long time ago but I believe the VMS V3.7 supplied a lot ofiE > the underpinnings for CI clusters like support for HSCs and the CI.h > This was in 1984  E 3.7 was to a good degree a cluster of one. Used $ENQ/$DEQ etc. 3.4 on = had MSCP disk support AIR, forget when the PA driver apeared.o  F > VMS V4.0, if I recall correctly, was the first release that actuallyA > allowed you to build a cluster.  Not sure when VMS V4.0 hit thedA > streets but I think 1985 would be a close guess.  I didn't have0G > software support at the time and the release after V3.6  was, for me,: > V4.4.t  H I installed 4.0 on 750s in Jan '85 in NL, so I think it was well out andH about by then. I first saw a cluster at the fall 83 DECUS in the chicken$ cooker. Next to the CFS-20 system :)   -- e< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.a@                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 10:59:32 -08007 From: jones.computer.srv@worldnet.att.net (Daryl Jones)y< Subject: Re: Non-WS Process Quotas not in Performance Manual= Message-ID: <8a646952.0401141059.7602fe34@posting.google.com>    To Everyone,  9 From Digital Technical Journal, Number 5, September 1987:r   Page 29-30:   C "In 1982, the first lock manager was provided in version 3.0 of the2 VAX/VMS operating system."  F "The distributed lock manager was released in 1984 with version 4.0 of8 the VAX/VMS operating system; the CI bus was used as the communications medium."j  8 "In 1986,the Local Area VAXcluster system was released."   Page 56:  D "The first VAXcluster implementation (VMS version 4.0) operated onlyD on the CI bus, a limited-distance LAN connecting up to sixteen nodes at 70 megabits per second."C     I hope this helps.   Regards, Daryl Jones    F      a Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote in message news:<8765fey4t7.fsf@prep.synonet.com>...n7 > "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> writes:E > G > > It was a long time ago but I believe the VMS V3.7 supplied a lot ofeG > > the underpinnings for CI clusters like support for HSCs and the CI.  > > This was in 1984 > G > 3.7 was to a good degree a cluster of one. Used $ENQ/$DEQ etc. 3.4 ona? > had MSCP disk support AIR, forget when the PA driver apeared., > H > > VMS V4.0, if I recall correctly, was the first release that actuallyC > > allowed you to build a cluster.  Not sure when VMS V4.0 hit the C > > streets but I think 1985 would be a close guess.  I didn't have I > > software support at the time and the release after V3.6  was, for me,s	 > > V4.4.  > J > I installed 4.0 on 750s in Jan '85 in NL, so I think it was well out andJ > about by then. I first saw a cluster at the fall 83 DECUS in the chicken& > cooker. Next to the CFS-20 system :)   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 07:23:14 -0700 8 From: "Michael D. Ober" <obermd-.@.-alum-mit-edu-nospam>8 Subject: OFF TOPIC:  Re: To all "patriotic" americans...1 Message-ID: <nhcNb.584$F83.17375@news.uswest.net>a  D And just what does this have to do with VMS?  I know OT is the usualK reference for Off Topic, but this is so far off that it needs to be spelled  out!  
 Mike Ober.  K "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote in messagea0 news:4004B331.63915548@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net... > Tony Reed wrote: > >i: > > In article <40019B8F.F2DC14A7@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>,F > >  "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote: > > F > > :I don't think it was guilt so much as being desirous of leaving a legacy5 > > :other than that of one of great "robber barons".e > >iJ > > These old "robber barons" all made their money befoe income taxes were< > > introduced. This is more important than one might think. >@
 > Explain. >v > > I blame Henryn= > > Ford for Walmart. I blame the Romans for everything else.w >e > I don't get the connection.  >iD > Henry Ford developed mass-production into a viable business model. >iB > Sam Walton developed discounted mass-merchandising into a viable > business model.  >kG > Rome developed debauchery, perversion and decadence into an art form.T >sF > Where's the link I'm not seeing? ...or is it as simple as "commodityD > products" that are affordable to the masses? (Rome doesn't fit the > pattern.)o >c > --   > David J. Dachterao > dba DJE Systems  > http://www.djesys.com/ >r* > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page:! > http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/0   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:25:00 +0100e( From: "Rudolf Wingert" <win@fom.fgan.de>3 Subject: OpenVMS is high availabilty par excellence : Message-ID: <MCELKPMOKPMNDNKJNIONGEPGCIAA.win@fom.fgan.de>   Hello,  M today I did read an article about an OpenVMS cluster running for an AmsterdamlK police station. It is running since April. 1997 24hours per day, 7 days per O week, without any interruption. During this time there was a rolling uograde toCK the newest OpenVMS, an update of the environment (SAN would be added) and a N transition of the depandance (7km distance). There was never a downtime. CouldL anybody show me an other cluster, which will have the same features? I dont	 think so.    Best regards Rudolf Wingerte   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 06:34:45 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)7 Subject: Re: OpenVMS is high availabilty par excellenceb= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0401140634.464ade23@posting.google.com>   j "Rudolf Wingert" <win@fom.fgan.de> wrote in message news:<MCELKPMOKPMNDNKJNIONGEPGCIAA.win@fom.fgan.de>... > Hello, > O > today I did read an article about an OpenVMS cluster running for an AmsterdamvM > police station. It is running since April. 1997 24hours per day, 7 days peroQ > week, without any interruption. During this time there was a rolling uograde toaM > the newest OpenVMS, an update of the environment (SAN would be added) and ahP > transition of the depandance (7km distance). There was never a downtime. CouldN > anybody show me an other cluster, which will have the same features? I dont > think so.t >  > Best regards Rudolf Wingerth  4 why don't we ask Andrew if slowaris or linux can ...   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:52:38 -0500/* From: "rob kas" <rob@paychoice.com.noSPAM>7 Subject: Re: OpenVMS is high availabilty par excellencei0 Message-ID: <100am15pb435m41@corp.supernews.com>  6 "Bob Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote in message 7 news:d7791aa1.0401140634.464ade23@posting.google.com...  > 6 > why don't we ask Andrew if slowaris or linux can ...      M    Ohhh God  will you stop baiting him into anther useless bandwidth wasting t thread.p   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 07:55:02 -0800' From: icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson)-Y Subject: Re: Oracle Rdb on GS1280 with 7.3-2 exceeds 1 million transactions per minute usr= Message-ID: <734da31c.0401140755.2ddcceeb@posting.google.com>3   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu1bn2$j1$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... > David Svensson wrote:TK > > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.coaC >  m> wrote in message news:<btuf3v$r3e$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...C > > J > > Many customers run VMS and Rdb, not surprising that HP and Oracle wantH > > to show some progress, and as far as I understand the text it's main5 > > purpose was to demonstrate the Row cache feature.- > >  > - > Then perhaps the headline should have read.5 > B > HP and Oracle demonstrate breakthrough row cacheing performance. > 3 > Rather than breakthrough transaction performance.-  C It probably was a breakthrough also on transaction performance, andcC transactions performance is something that people easily understandn6 and most likely will be interested to read more about.   >  > > ? > >>Of course if it is similar to TPC-C then 1 million TPM fromo= > >>a 32 way Alpha server would be very embarassing even more 0 > >>embarassing would be if it was TPC-C itself. > > > > > Pure FUD, unless you know exactly what the benchmark does. > > < > Not at all, the real issue for OpenVMS advocates should be: > if HP can assist with and then market a benchmark result? > that they have to explain isn't TPC-C why can't they do TPC-Ct
 > itself ?  E It was FUD to me. And HP does not seem so keen on advertising VMS andkB certainly not publishing benchmarks. This was an Oracle benchmark.  : > After all TPC-C on Alpha would provide a test of whether9 > the Itanium will triumph over Alpha claims are actuallyn > being realised or not.  @ Well, HP have said that they don't want to publish so many AlphaB benchmarks anymore, and I don't blame them. They need to show thatC Itanium look good. Itanium have good database benchmarks and a good0A guess is that Alpha EV7 also have good database results. Which isjE faster doesn't matter that much, because Compaq obviously didn't wantr" to be in the CPU business anymore.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:37:59 +0000nO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>eY Subject: Re: Oracle Rdb on GS1280 with 7.3-2 exceeds 1 million transactions per minute ust0 Message-ID: <bu3r98$qce$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David Svensson wrote:e > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu1bn2$j1$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... >  >>David Svensson wrote:f >>J >>>Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.co >>C >> m> wrote in message news:<btuf3v$r3e$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...i >>I >>>Many customers run VMS and Rdb, not surprising that HP and Oracle wantiG >>>to show some progress, and as far as I understand the text it's mainn4 >>>purpose was to demonstrate the Row cache feature. >>>n >>- >>Then perhaps the headline should have read.C >>B >>HP and Oracle demonstrate breakthrough row cacheing performance. >>3 >>Rather than breakthrough transaction performance.] >  > E > It probably was a breakthrough also on transaction performance, andiE > transactions performance is something that people easily understandf8 > and most likely will be interested to read more about.  : They would be a lot more interested if they could work out9 what the transaction(s) was/were and how that might apply 9 to their app, as it is is pretty close to useless to mostw people, including yourself.   G > It was FUD to me. And HP does not seem so keen on advertising VMS andeD > certainly not publishing benchmarks. This was an Oracle benchmark. >   8 Well it may be FUD to you but I can guarantee that a lot6 of OpenVMS supporters would like to see a TCP-C result published for the GS1280.o   Regardsn Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:20:51 GMTe4 From: brad@.gateway.2wire.net (Bradford J. Hamilton)Y Subject: OT - English (UK) humor - (was Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of op - Message-ID: <7fcNb.50004$5V2.65561@attbi_s53>a  S In article <00A2BDF9.D02B16FF@SendSpamHere.ORG>, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:t !!snip! B !>I interpreted it that way too. The UK Pantomime season runs fromI !>approximately mid-December to about now. Lots of audience participationn
 !>such as  !> !>"He's behind you"- !>"Oh no he isn't" !>"Oh yes he is" !>4 !>Great fun for the whole family when done properly. !mC !Hurry, somebody queue up the old Monty Python "Argument" sketch...b !1  N Here in the States, if you have Comcast Digital Cable TV, you can request manyM MP episodes from the BBC America channel, for free.  My youngest children arel now being indoctrinated...   !--0C !http://www.legacy-2000.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system securityeD !                            solutions that others only claim to be. !-- L !VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM !           6 !  "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"   J __________________________________________________________________________A Bradford J. Hamilton                    "All opinions are my own"eK bMradAhamiPltSon-at-coMmcAast.nPeSt     "Lose the MAPS, and replace '-at-' n0                                          with @"   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:48:55 GMTr" From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORGY Subject: Re: OT - English (UK) humor - (was Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure o40 Message-ID: <00A2BE1C.E6FB81E2@SendSpamHere.ORG>  d In article <7fcNb.50004$5V2.65561@attbi_s53>, brad@.gateway.2wire.net (Bradford J. Hamilton) writes:T >In article <00A2BDF9.D02B16FF@SendSpamHere.ORG>, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >!!snip!C >!>I interpreted it that way too. The UK Pantomime season runs fromeJ >!>approximately mid-December to about now. Lots of audience participation >!>such as e >!>a >!>"He's behind you" >!>"Oh no he isn't"s >!>"Oh yes he is"  >!> 5 >!>Great fun for the whole family when done properly.e >!D >!Hurry, somebody queue up the old Monty Python "Argument" sketch... >! >,O >Here in the States, if you have Comcast Digital Cable TV, you can request many7N >MP episodes from the BBC America channel, for free.  My youngest children are >now being indoctrinated...w  ; I have the entire series on DVD... as well as the movies.  a  G ...At the age of fifteen Doug and Dinsdale started attending the Ernest7G Pythagoras Primary School in Clerkenwell. When the Piranhas left school:F they were called up but were found by an Army Board to be too unstableF even for National Service. Denied the opportunity to use their talentsG in the service of their country, they began to operate what they called.G 'The Operation'... They would select a victim and then threaten to beat.H him up if he paid the so-called protection money. Four months later theyF started another operation which they called 'The Other Operation'. In G this racket they selected another victim and threatened not to beat himdH up if he didn't pay them. One month later they hit upon 'The Other OtherI Operation'. In this the victim was threatened that if he didn't pay them,rL they would beat him up. This for the Piranha brothers was the turning point.     Doesn't git much better. --B http://www.legacy-2000.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system securityC                             solutions that others only claim to be.l -- .K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM             e5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" s   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:58:37 GMT 9 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <my-last-name@stardotzko.dec.com>tY Subject: Re: OT - English (UK) humor - (was Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure o 3 Message-ID: <hrfNb.12314$IZ3.1380@news.cpqcorp.net>   A "Bradford J. Hamilton" <brad@.gateway.2wire.net> wrote in message ' news:7fcNb.50004$5V2.65561@attbi_s53...g  ! >eK > Here in the States, if you have Comcast Digital Cable TV, you can request  manyK > MP episodes from the BBC America channel, for free.  My youngest children- are- > now being indoctrinated... >e  K Yes, but for a small investment, you can purchase the complete set of DVDs._K A very worthwhile investment... and longterm cheaper than Digital Cable ;-)3   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:17:47 +00005O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>-Y Subject: Re: OT - English (UK) humor - (was Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure oT0 Message-ID: <bu3tjr$r89$2@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   VAXman- wrote:f > In article <7fcNb.50004$5V2.65561@attbi_s53>, brad@.gateway.2wire.net (Bradford J. Hamilton) writes: > U >>In article <00A2BDF9.D02B16FF@SendSpamHere.ORG>, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:i	 >>!!snip!aD >>!>I interpreted it that way too. The UK Pantomime season runs fromK >>!>approximately mid-December to about now. Lots of audience participation  >>!>such as  >>!> >>!>"He's behind you"b >>!>"Oh no he isn't" >>!>"Oh yes he is" >>!>6 >>!>Great fun for the whole family when done properly. >>!tE >>!Hurry, somebody queue up the old Monty Python "Argument" sketch...o >>!  >>P >>Here in the States, if you have Comcast Digital Cable TV, you can request manyO >>MP episodes from the BBC America channel, for free.  My youngest children are1 >>now being indoctrinated... >  > = > I have the entire series on DVD... as well as the movies.  : > I > ...At the age of fifteen Doug and Dinsdale started attending the Ernest@I > Pythagoras Primary School in Clerkenwell. When the Piranhas left schooltH > they were called up but were found by an Army Board to be too unstableH > even for National Service. Denied the opportunity to use their talentsI > in the service of their country, they began to operate what they calledeI > 'The Operation'... They would select a victim and then threaten to beatnJ > him up if he paid the so-called protection money. Four months later theyH > started another operation which they called 'The Other Operation'. In I > this racket they selected another victim and threatened not to beat himrJ > up if he didn't pay them. One month later they hit upon 'The Other OtherK > Operation'. In this the victim was threatened that if he didn't pay them,oN > they would beat him up. This for the Piranha brothers was the turning point. >   6 I can't remember the excat wording but I liked the bit in the sketch which goes.i    Why didn't you call the police ?  9 Well I noticed that the man carrying the tactical nuclearg device was the chief constable..   Regards  Andrew Harrisond >  > Doesn't git much better. > --D > http://www.legacy-2000.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system securityE >                             solutions that others only claim to be.    ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:51:09 -0500 (EST)>+ From: Lord Isildur <isildur@andrew.cmu.edu>f< Subject: Re: Personal Workstation 500a/au hardware questionsH Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58-035.0401140946470.2176@unix44.andrew.cmu.edu>  
 greetings,  + On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 sms@antinode.org wrote:r >-I >    I can add an internal SCSI CD-ROM easily enough, but faster, cheapereJ > IDE CD-RW drives are also more common than SCSI.  (Also, I'd like to useG > a wide SCSI hard disk, but wide CD-ROM drives are not selling for $5, I > either, and I hate to waste two ports on the SCSI card for the internalp$ > stuff.  Everything's complicated.)  H you could also get a 68-50 pin adapter, which does cost about 5 dollars.  - > From: Lord Isildur <isildur@andrew.cmu.edu>r >t- > > [...] we solved the issue by buying a fewe7 > > pci ide cards and not using the onboard one at all.i >fI >    Is there an add-in IDE adapter supported (or even tolerated) by VMS?   H that, i dont know. there should be lists of supported hardware somewhereL out there. I would imagine so- newer machines with ide don't use the cmd646,G and are yet usable by vms. standalone versions of those interfaces musttD exist. The only vms machines i run are VAXen, so i am not of any use= to know this though... all the alphas i run are running unix.> > D >    Thanks for confirming my disappointing conclusions, by the way.   no problemo. good luck with it!o   isildurr   ------------------------------   Date: 14 Jan 2004 11:02:02 GMT< From: gartmann@non.immunbio.mpg.de.sens (Christoph Gartmann)" Subject: Re: PowerStorm 300 & DS250 Message-ID: <bu37ja$nbb$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>  N In article <bu1asa$46a$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>, I (Christoph Gartmann) wrote:L >in a brand-new DS25 I installed a PowerStorm 300 graphics card. At the bootL >prompt I entered "set console graphics" and then "init" but I still get theM >boot prompt on the serial console. Booting into OpenVMS finally produces the M >login-screen at the graphics monitor. Is it possible to have the boot-prompti >there as well?.  K Now I found the reason: while the card is supported under OpenVMS it is nota in the DS25.   Regards,    Christoph Gartmannn   -- eE  Max-Planck-Institut fuer      Phone   : +49-761-5108-464   Fax: -452T  ImmunbiologieI  Postfach 1169                 Internet: gartmann@immunbio dot mpg dot det  D-79011  Freiburg, Germanyo9                http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/menue.html    ------------------------------   Date: 14 Jan 2004 14:30:41 GMT< From: gartmann@non.immunbio.mpg.de.sens (Christoph Gartmann)" Subject: Re: PowerStorm 300 & DS250 Message-ID: <bu3jqh$s7t$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>  N In article <bu37ja$nbb$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>, I (Christoph Gartmann) wrote:O >In article <bu1asa$46a$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>, I (Christoph Gartmann) wrote: M >>in a brand-new DS25 I installed a PowerStorm 300 graphics card. At the boot.M >>prompt I entered "set console graphics" and then "init" but I still get thesN >>boot prompt on the serial console. Booting into OpenVMS finally produces theN >>login-screen at the graphics monitor. Is it possible to have the boot-prompt >>there as well? > L >Now I found the reason: while the card is supported under OpenVMS it is not
 >in the DS25.t  K Again I stand corrected: in HP's hardware maintenance manual is stated thatwI a graphics card may not be installed in a slot belonging to "hose 0", thetC 5 Volt/33 MHz slots. The Powerstorm 300 is a 5V card. The manual isoM definitively wrong. My card is a SN-PBXGD-AD with a jumper named J1. This onepK shortened pin 1 and 2 which means "VGA disable". Now it covers 2 and 3 (VGAr enable) and all is fine.   Sorry for botheringl    Christoph Gartmanna   -- XE  Max-Planck-Institut fuer      Phone   : +49-761-5108-464   Fax: -452-  ImmunbiologieI  Postfach 1169                 Internet: gartmann@immunbio dot mpg dot dec  D-79011  Freiburg, GermanyI9                http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/menue.htmls   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:11:49 GMTa% From: Rob Brown <mylastname@gmcl.com>p Subject: Re: Purging NTP logL Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401141110090.26698-100000@localhost.localdomain>    On 13 Jan 2004, Tom Adams wrote:  D > Is there an easy way to keep the NTP log file from growing without	 > limits?e > G > I don't see a way to start NTP using SYS$STARTUP:NTP_STARTUP.COM thata > sendsa > the log file to NL:e > H > The only idea I have is to stop and start NTP on a daily basis so thatG > it creates a new log file, then purge the old log files.  It that they > best approach?  A Which ntp?  In UCX V4.1, a new log file is automatically created t7 daily.  Set a version limit on the file and no worries.t    e   -- h  ! Rob Brown                         A G. Michaels Consulting Ltd.      (866)438-2101 (voice) toll free!m6 Edmonton                         (780)438-9343 (voice)4                                  (780)437-3367 (FAX)1                                  http://gmcl.com/e   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 02:49:58 -0800. From: fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br (Fabio Cardoso)* Subject: SCO, Novell publish Unix disputes= Message-ID: <f30679fb.0401140249.7012455e@posting.google.com>    Clickn  9 http://news.com.com/2100-7344_3-5140381.html?tag=nefd_top   E SCO Group and Novell began publicly airing documents related to theirCA dispute over Unix copyrights--important factors in SCO's claim tow< intellectual property rights for the Linux operating system.  A SCO's and Novell's documents offer details of the 1995 deal under:9 which Novell sold its Unix business to SCO's predecessor.>   (...)I    > Pirelli motto in Brazil is "Power is nothing without control".  ? By the way, the Society cannot live without control ! How theseoA Open Source guys believe they can be anarchist and revolution the F world with free software ?  They dont have control of the own software
 they develop.o  E In my personal opinion, the Open Source code should be "patented" in eD a specifc way ! Not distribute it for free without an identification. or assignment. May be using the POSIX group !    Regardso   FC   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:59:48 +0800h, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>4 Subject: Re: Silly Users with Password as "Password"- Message-ID: <871xq2y3rv.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   % hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes:   c > In article <btnevk$dm0$1@hercules.btinternet.com>, "Robert" <robert.heyes@btinternet.com> writes:a  A > :Ive written a program today to check the SYSUAF.DAT for all myiA > users in a :group and find any naughty users who havent changed6A > their password from the :default I would set (which for examplegF > would be PASSWORD), eg. Username :JBLOGGS Password PASSWORD by doingF > $dir nodename"JBLOGGS :PASSWORD"::Login*.com and checking the returnE > code. If the dir command was :successful then output that user namer5 > to a text file as the password hadnt :been changed.   F If your password really is "PASSWORD", then you will not ever succeed,E there is all sorts of code that 'knows' that 'password' is not a real @ password but the mask string RMS and NCP use to replace the real
 password.    passWord on the other hand...s   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.4@                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------   Date: 14 Jan 2004 07:26:26 GMT2 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems 5 Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-XKSvpSc7kyB0@localhost>r  D On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:37:32 UTC, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy . <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:  @ > Even CERT which is a highly unreliable source puts OpenVMS way< > ahead of VMS for vunerabilities. There was the DECnet Worm > and thats just about it.  F Eh?!  OpenVMS ahead of VMS ? Is there a typo there? If so, is it yours or that of the unrelable CERT?   -- i Cheers - Dave.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:19:27 +0100m* From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems 0 Message-ID: <400517AF.5D17DAEE@sture.homeip.net>  * Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote: > i > In article <734da31c.0401131018.7bcce8b4@posting.google.com>, icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson) writes:n > >Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu12iq$qi9$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... > >> Bob Koehler wrote:t > >> > In article <bu0i0q$kn8$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes:m > >> > > >> >E > >> >>Care to speculate on how different the OpenVMS distribution iseN > >> >>now to the VAX distribution in the 80's in terms of code, functionality > >> >>etc etc.a > >> > > >> >( > >> >    Better.  Larger.  More secure. > >> > > >> >    No, I'm not guessing.x > >> > > >> Ohhh yessssss yooou are.b > >> > >c# > >Is this a serious Sun employee ?i > >cF > >Give some bad taste of Sun actually, of an otherwise great company. > >tI > >Shame that my good view of Sun is darkened by this embarrasing person.a > L > While I hold no brief for Andrew, or for Sun, and while I'm fully on boardM > the "VMS is more secure" boat, I do think I should point out that Andrew issL > behaving here, very clearly, in the tradition of English Pantomimes, stageQ > shows which include a certain amount of audience chanting along with characterso > saying >  >  "Oh, yes I do!" >  "Oh, no I don't!" > L > So this post of his is, in form at least, a bit more playful than it might > appear on the surface. >   @ I interpreted it that way too. The UK Pantomime season runs fromG approximately mid-December to about now. Lots of audience participations such as    "He's behind you"h "Oh no he isn't" "Oh yes he is"  2 Great fun for the whole family when done properly.   --  
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:13:46 +0000pO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>nI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems 0 Message-ID: <bu3bpr$kri$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>  * Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote:  L > While I hold no brief for Andrew, or for Sun, and while I'm fully on boardM > the "VMS is more secure" boat, I do think I should point out that Andrew is.L > behaving here, very clearly, in the tradition of English Pantomimes, stageQ > shows which include a certain amount of audience chanting along with characters. > saying >  >  "Oh, yes I do!" >  "Oh, no I don't!" >   5 I was trying to work He is Behind You into the threadn8 as well but there hasn't been an appropriate opportunity
 to do so yet.e   Regardsy AndrewL > So this post of his is, in form at least, a bit more playful than it might > appear on the surface. > 	 > -- Alane   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:37:45 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORGI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsr0 Message-ID: <00A2BDF9.D02B16FF@SendSpamHere.ORG>  ] In article <400517AF.5D17DAEE@sture.homeip.net>, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net> writes:e+ >Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote:y >> dj >> In article <734da31c.0401131018.7bcce8b4@posting.google.com>, icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson) writes: >> >Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu12iq$qi9$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...m >> >> Bob Koehler wrote: >> >> > In article <bu0i0q$kn8$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: >> >> >e >> >> > F >> >> >>Care to speculate on how different the OpenVMS distribution isO >> >> >>now to the VAX distribution in the 80's in terms of code, functionality  >> >> >>etc etc. >> >> >u >> >> >e) >> >> >    Better.  Larger.  More secure.f >> >> >n  >> >> >    No, I'm not guessing. >> >> >d >> >> Ohhh yessssss yooou are. >> >>0 >> >$ >> >Is this a serious Sun employee ? >> >G >> >Give some bad taste of Sun actually, of an otherwise great company.  >> >J >> >Shame that my good view of Sun is darkened by this embarrasing person. >> yM >> While I hold no brief for Andrew, or for Sun, and while I'm fully on boardrN >> the "VMS is more secure" boat, I do think I should point out that Andrew isM >> behaving here, very clearly, in the tradition of English Pantomimes, stagetR >> shows which include a certain amount of audience chanting along with characters	 >> saying- >> a >>  "Oh, yes I do!"1 >>  "Oh, no I don't!"m >> oM >> So this post of his is, in form at least, a bit more playful than it mightU >> appear on the surface.- >> W >bA >I interpreted it that way too. The UK Pantomime season runs fromTH >approximately mid-December to about now. Lots of audience participation	 >such as u >a >"He's behind you" >"Oh no he isn't"m >"Oh yes he is"i >l3 >Great fun for the whole family when done properly.   B Hurry, somebody queue up the old Monty Python "Argument" sketch...   --B http://www.legacy-2000.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system securityC                             solutions that others only claim to be.n --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM2            -5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" u   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:45:32 +0000OO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>cI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsd0 Message-ID: <bu3dld$li7$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Chris Casey wrote:M > "Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy" <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>o > wrote in message > 
 >>>>I have@ >>>>however claimed that OpenVMS isn't as secure as people think8 >>>>it is and proved the claim on a number of occasions. >>>> >>>>Regards: >>>>Andrew Harrisona >>>> >  > B >>Your assumption that I have attacked OpenVMS's relative securityB >>vs other OS's is incorrect I have not as is your assumption that@ >>I have failed to support the points I have made with evidence. >>F >>I have attacked and will continue to attack the OpenVMS BS merchantsF >>who claim that OpenVMS must be more secure than any other OS becauseH >>it gets less CERT advisories posted for it because it is a BS measure. >  > G >>Pehaps you should read the thread a bit more carefully before jumping4! >>in it would certainly help you.f >>	 >>Regardsa >>Andrew Harrisone >  > 	 > ANDREW,u > M > you are obviously unwilling or unable to understand the English language so L > I will not bother to debate the point any further after this note. It is aL > shame that you take such an objectionable stand because on some topics you* > actually have some valid points to make. > L > I have not assumed anything and have not asked you to defend your positionL > on VMS security vs. any other. I merely asked you to stop attacking othersM > on the subject unless you have a valid point to make regarding the position M > of VMS security vs. any other o/s. You do not appear to have any such pointpC > to make but merely hide behind a relentless carping on about CERTh
 > advisories.o >  Oh dear oh dear.  C I am not attacking OpenVMS security I am attacking the BS merchantsJH who base their arguments that OpenVMS is the most secure OS on published CERTS.  C I have explained this to you over and over again and its clear thatD' you are having a comprehension problem.o  7   shut up. If you think that VMS is not the most securelM > operating system then state your case and give evidence to prove it withoutrI > any reference to CERT as you obviously think that any such reference iss > totally invalid. >   4 Well you almost got there but not quite. If you want2 me to shut up then you should persuade the OpenVMS0 Security troll(s) to make their case but without0 using any reference to CERT. There may be plenty/ of valid reasons why OpenVMS is a secure OS buta2 I have already proven that OpenVMS CERT counts are not one of them.   Regardst Andrew Harrisons   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:04:38 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)<I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsm3 Message-ID: <FUI9DPIlrrMC@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  U In article <00A2BDF9.D02B16FF@SendSpamHere.ORG>,   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:p > D > Hurry, somebody queue up the old Monty Python "Argument" sketch... >   4    Shpuld we drag out the SPAM sketch along with it?   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:53:33 GMT4# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>rI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsnH Message-ID: <NJcNb.22759$%wh.21855@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > D > Hurry, somebody queue up the old Monty Python "Argument" sketch...    3 http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/sn-python.htmla   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 08:59:03 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems 3 Message-ID: <GVp+71XZnWlU@eisner.encompasserve.org>a   In article <bu1e4u$1a5$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: > 2 > I was pre-empting the I have seen the sources so6 > I know but can't tell you response that Bob supplied  C    I didn't say I can't tell you , I said you don't know.  I didn'tpC    even mention the other sources that I can't tell you from.  MoreN>    importantly I refuted you're assertion that I was guessing.  H    I'm sure someone inside Sun got a hold of the source listings at some2    time.  Maybe you can learn what you don't know.  @    And security through obscurity is simply not the VMS aproach.   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:02:06 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)cI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems.3 Message-ID: <ZtEyokPlfofQ@eisner.encompasserve.org>r   In article <bu1dtd$168$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: > Bob Koehler wrote: >> In article <bu12iq$qi9$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes:e > @ > Even CERT which is a highly unreliable source puts OpenVMS way< > ahead of VMS for vunerabilities. There was the DECnet Worm > and thats just about it.  =    That's hard to beleive since OpenVMS is VMS.  How can A bec    ahead of A?  9 > So Ohhh Yesss You Arrr untill that is you can prove youa > arn'tM  D    Your inability to follow logic undermines your reputation as someG    kind of Sun engineer.  Next time we deal with Sun, we'll be stearingr    clear of you.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:49:35 GMTE# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>nI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsiH Message-ID: <3GcNb.22729$%wh.14579@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  ( Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: >e6 > Well you almost got there but not quite. If you want4 > me to shut up then you should persuade the OpenVMS2 > Security troll(s) to make their case but without2 > using any reference to CERT. There may be plenty1 > of valid reasons why OpenVMS is a secure OS butv4 > I have already proven that OpenVMS CERT counts are > not one of them.     Write carly(tm) atK http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/execteam/email/fiorina/index.html and tell her youCI are getting fed up bashing VMS and would she please begin advertising its-I security so the facts can be quoted from the horse's mouth , so to speak.<L Just recall that like any other o/s vendor (or person), HP can be sued if itE publically) makes false claims.  (hmmmmm .......I wonder if that alsoS applies to EV79?)r  J But before you go to all this effort, why don't you personally take a lookI at the VMS source code listings and see what bugs you can spot...you're awL bright lad and I'm sure than all the failures of VMS security will just leapF off the screen at you whilst you focus your legendary insight upon theK code...... .I'm sure your lawyers will ask you when you examined the sourcec prior to your spouting off.....d   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:06:06 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)-I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsb3 Message-ID: <Gsm$CRAsSO5z@eisner.encompasserve.org>a   In article <bu3dld$li7$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: > 6 > Well you almost got there but not quite. If you want4 > me to shut up then you should persuade the OpenVMS= > Security [adjective deleted] to make their case but withoutu2 > using any reference to CERT. There may be plenty1 > of valid reasons why OpenVMS is a secure OS but84 > I have already proven that OpenVMS CERT counts are > not one of them.  4    We did that, but you ignored it.  How convenient.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:16:13 +0000nO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>mI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsT0 Message-ID: <bu3mfu$oka$2@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   John Smith wrote:s* > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: > 6 >>Well you almost got there but not quite. If you want4 >>me to shut up then you should persuade the OpenVMS2 >>Security troll(s) to make their case but without2 >>using any reference to CERT. There may be plenty1 >>of valid reasons why OpenVMS is a secure OS buts4 >>I have already proven that OpenVMS CERT counts are >>not one of them. >  >  >  > Write carly(tm) atM > http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/execteam/email/fiorina/index.html and tell her youaK > are getting fed up bashing VMS and would she please begin advertising itsoK > security so the facts can be quoted from the horse's mouth , so to speak. N > Just recall that like any other o/s vendor (or person), HP can be sued if itG > publically) makes false claims.  (hmmmmm .......I wonder if that alsom > applies to EV79?)  >l) I am not convinced that Bob works for HP.e  L > But before you go to all this effort, why don't you personally take a lookK > at the VMS source code listings and see what bugs you can spot...you're amN > bright lad and I'm sure than all the failures of VMS security will just leapH > off the screen at you whilst you focus your legendary insight upon theM > code...... .I'm sure your lawyers will ask you when you examined the source ! > prior to your spouting off.....A >  >   ; I don't need to read the source the information you requirel is in the patch reports.   Regardsl Andrew Harrisone   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:17:55 +0000aO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>mI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsv0 Message-ID: <bu3mj4$oka$3@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Bob Koehler wrote: > In article <bu3dld$li7$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: > 6 >>Well you almost got there but not quite. If you want4 >>me to shut up then you should persuade the OpenVMS= >>Security [adjective deleted] to make their case but withouti2 >>using any reference to CERT. There may be plenty1 >>of valid reasons why OpenVMS is a secure OS but 4 >>I have already proven that OpenVMS CERT counts are >>not one of them. >  > 6 >    We did that, but you ignored it.  How convenient. > / Sorry but you very definitely did not, you went<1 into secret squirrel mode which proved absolutelyt nothing. How inconvenient.   Regardsn Andrew Harrisoni   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 07:41:24 -0800' From: icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson) I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsh= Message-ID: <734da31c.0401140741.384d4be9@posting.google.com>u   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu1bru$j1$2@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... > David Svensson wrote:a > > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<btuaef$p9t$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...o > > < > >>But then I havn't suggested that OpenVMS is more or less= > >>secure than any other OS so you don't get to play. I haven@ > >>however claimed that OpenVMS isn't as secure as people think8 > >>it is and proved the claim on a number of occasions. > >> > >>RegardsD > >>Andrew Harrisono > >  > >  > > H > > There are real and sound reasons why OpenVMS has a lot better chanceJ > > of being more secure than UNIX systems. And people don't just think it1 > > is secure, they have actually experienced it.- > = > Well then use them in your argument and don't rely on CERTS  > per OS, its a BS measure.- > 	 > Regards, > Andrew Harrison5   I don't rely on CERTS.  I Whether it's a BS measure is something other people debate, I don't care.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:23:36 +00005O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsU0 Message-ID: <bu3mtp$osl$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Bob Koehler wrote: > In article <bu1e4u$1a5$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: > 2 >>I was pre-empting the I have seen the sources so6 >>I know but can't tell you response that Bob supplied >  > E >    I didn't say I can't tell you , I said you don't know.  I didn'tyE >    even mention the other sources that I can't tell you from.  Mored@ >    importantly I refuted you're assertion that I was guessing. >   4 No you made a claim that you failed to back up, that6 isn't refuting anything its more like the Monty Python  or pantomime school of argument.  2 You seem to have forgotten that I have bothered to3 back up my claims something that again you claim tol$ have refuted but in fact never have.  9 Forgive me but faced with ECO's, Ask the Wizard responseso= etc which contradict you, your trust me I have seen the NDA'sM is hardly convincing.AJ >    I'm sure someone inside Sun got a hold of the source listings at some4 >    time.  Maybe you can learn what you don't know. >   B >    And security through obscurity is simply not the VMS aproach.  : Sorry but this is just more BS not supported by the facts.  9 Check out the sorry saga of the POP security hole as just6 one example.   Regards  Andrew HarrisonN   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 07:57:45 -0800' From: icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson)BI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsi= Message-ID: <734da31c.0401140757.5681ce54@posting.google.com>    Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu1e4u$1a5$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  > David Svensson wrote:  > > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu12iq$qi9$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...r > >  > >>Bob Koehler wrote: > >> > >>>In article <bu0i0q$kn8$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes:c > >>>d > >>>  > >>>tD > >>>>Care to speculate on how different the OpenVMS distribution isM > >>>>now to the VAX distribution in the 80's in terms of code, functionalityS > >>>>etc etc. > >>>h > >>>P& > >>>   Better.  Larger.  More secure. > >>>e > >>>   No, I'm not guessing.  > >>>t > >> > >>Ohhh yessssss yooou are. > >> > >  > > $ > > Is this a serious Sun employee ? > > G > > Give some bad taste of Sun actually, of an otherwise great company.T > > J > > Shame that my good view of Sun is darkened by this embarrasing person. > > 
 > > /David > 3 > No because a point that Bob cannot prove deservesc > to be treated lightly. > 2 > I was pre-empting the I have seen the sources so6 > I know but can't tell you response that Bob supplied > 5 > Security through obscurity has its downsides as youo > and Bob have just found out. > 	 > Regardse > Andrew Harrison   , That is not something I have just found out.  F There are less users on VMS than UNIX and Windows, but there are stillE good reasons for VMS to be more secure than UNIX and Windows systems.   C And pointing out CERT is not a bad thing, even if you think CERT is D wrong many people view and believe in CERT. I think you should greetE Keith for pointing out CERT because then you got a chance to say that- CERT is not good.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:49:29 -0500m< From: "Peter Weaver" <WeaverConsultingServices@sympatico.ca>I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems 9 Message-ID: <bu3rus$crrqc$1@ID-141708.news.uni-berlin.de>m   Mark Berryman wrote: >...8 > I'm calling you on your bluff.  You claim the security
 concerns with ; > VMS tend to get obfuscated.  Trot 'em out and show 'em to  us.e >...  ' And Andrew disappears from this thread.c   --   Peter Weaver Weaver Consulting Services Inc.e Canadian VAR for CHARON-VAXe www.weaverconsulting.cam   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:51:14 GMTt" From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORGI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems40 Message-ID: <00A2BE1D.393B6B3A@SendSpamHere.ORG>  n In article <NJcNb.22759$%wh.21855@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes:! >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:- >>E >> Hurry, somebody queue up the old Monty Python "Argument" sketch...f >. >04 >http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/sn-python.html >  >H  3 Thank you Mr.  Harry "Snapper" Organs for that URL.e --B http://www.legacy-2000.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system securityC                             solutions that others only claim to be.p -- mK VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM             H5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" i   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:53:36 GMT>" From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORGI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsv0 Message-ID: <00A2BE1D.8E98AC02@SendSpamHere.ORG>  q In article <FUI9DPIlrrMC@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: V >In article <00A2BDF9.D02B16FF@SendSpamHere.ORG>,   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >> eE >> Hurry, somebody queue up the old Monty Python "Argument" sketch...y >> o >n5 >   Shpuld we drag out the SPAM sketch along with it?r >a  ( What do you mean ech! I don't like spam!   --B http://www.legacy-2000.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system securityC                             solutions that others only claim to be.a -- aK VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMa             5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" r   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:32:25 +0000rO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>oI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsO0 Message-ID: <bu3qup$q5b$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David Svensson wrote:' > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bu1bru$j1$2@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... >  >>David Svensson wrote:c >> >>>Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<btuaef$p9t$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... >>>  >>>d< >>>>But then I havn't suggested that OpenVMS is more or less= >>>>secure than any other OS so you don't get to play. I havei@ >>>>however claimed that OpenVMS isn't as secure as people think8 >>>>it is and proved the claim on a number of occasions. >>>> >>>>Regards  >>>>Andrew Harrisono >>>i >>>< >>>uG >>>There are real and sound reasons why OpenVMS has a lot better chanceeI >>>of being more secure than UNIX systems. And people don't just think it.0 >>>is secure, they have actually experienced it. >>= >>Well then use them in your argument and don't rely on CERTS  >>per OS, its a BS measure.  >>	 >>Regardsv >>Andrew Harrisonm >  >  > I don't rely on CERTS. >   7 So why on earth are you getting involved in an argumente6 which is about the validity of a measure that uses the5 number of CERTS per OS as a measure apparently on theg+ its good to use CERT side of the argument ?0    K > Whether it's a BS measure is something other people debate, I don't care.n  0 Then WHY get involved in the discussion at all ?   Regardse Andrew Harrisona   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:19:07 -0600 ( From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsw/ Message-ID: <00A2BE18.B06AB9D9.3@tachysoft.com>e  < >From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vmsJ >Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems     >In article <bu3dld$li7$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes:  >> a7 >> Well you almost got there but not quite. If you want-5 >> me to shut up then you should persuade the OpenVMS2> >> Security [adjective deleted] to make their case but without3 >> using any reference to CERT. There may be plentyb2 >> of valid reasons why OpenVMS is a secure OS but5 >> I have already proven that OpenVMS CERT counts aren >> not one of them.- > 5 >   We did that, but you ignored it.  How convenient.    And consistent.eO ===============================================================================hN Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738   wayne@tachysoft.com; http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html    O ===============================================================================nB Jed Clampett, checking into hotel: "This place got a cement pond?", 	Ellie May: "And do yuh let critters in it?"   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:15:06 +0000 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> I Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems-0 Message-ID: <bu3teq$r89$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   VAXman- wrote:s > In article <FUI9DPIlrrMC@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:i > W >>In article <00A2BDF9.D02B16FF@SendSpamHere.ORG>,   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:I >>E >>>Hurry, somebody queue up the old Monty Python "Argument" sketch...e >>>> >>5 >>  Shpuld we drag out the SPAM sketch along with it?a >> >  > * > What do you mean ech! I don't like spam! >    Not even fritters    regardsh Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:03:33 +0000cO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>wI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsS0 Message-ID: <bu409m$sa8$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Mark Berryman wrote:* > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: >  >> Bob Koehler wrote:i >>E >>> In article <bu12iq$qi9$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison 0E >>> SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes:G >>>w >>>  >>>> Ohhh yessssss yooou are.r >>>  >>>  >>>  >>> G >>>    Care to speculate as to which one of us has access to the source. >>>    listings and NDA info?r >>>hG >>>    I have no reason to BS you, Andrew.  When I say I'm not guessing-( >>>    its a fact.  Not a boast, a fact. >>>9 >>D >> Well lets just examine the external evidence shall we rather than2 >> your rahter laughable secret squirrel response. >>A >> Even CERT which is a highly unreliable source puts OpenVMS way,= >> ahead of VMS for vunerabilities. There was the DECnet Wormm >> and thats just about it.l >>A >> On the other had the current OS has SSH, Bind, and a number ofa" >> other advisories posted for it. >>? >> Security through obscurity cuts both ways because it removesi9 >> your ability to prove your point while I at least haveP >> collateral to support mine. >>: >> So Ohhh Yesss You Arrr untill that is you can prove you >> arn't >  > J > But I have proven it.  Unfortunately, for whatever reason, you have not F > been able to accept (or perhaps understand) the proof.  It probably & > isn't worth it but I will try again. > I > I have SSH on my VMS system.  It is NOT openssh.  Are you aware of any  K > advisories against it?  I can state that my VMS system has never been in (4 > any sort of security or DoS danger because of SSH. >     I > I have BIND on my system.  None of the vulnerabilities posted for BIND (H > have ever been able to impact my VMS version of BIND and I test every K > one.  So, how does the fact that I run BIND impact the level of security . > of my VMS system?) >   1 There are only two ways this claim could be true.   , 1.	You are using a non commercial version of+ 	Bind, all the commercial versions have had_- 	CERT advisories (or patches relating to CERTo 	advisories) posted for them.m  & 2.	You installed bind after the fixes.  F > You have tried to claim the certain patches to VMS layered products G > should have been reported to CERT (if CERT was to be used as a valid rC > metric) because they addressed security issues.  However, when I  C > followed up on the ones you claimed, that claim turned out to be eG > specious (the patches were not, in fact, fixing any kind of security h	 > issue).   : Not true sorry, there is for example a patch for teardrop.5 There are patches for Bind, POP, SSH etc all of whichn are security patches.w   > I > So, let's get specific.  You say the CERT advisories aren't valid as a  G > metric because too many security issues in VMS don't get reported to  H > CERT.  Let's start there.  Name some.  I'll follow up and verify your K > accuracy.  Remember, it has to be something that impacts the security or 0 > stability of VMS.c >   ! Where would you like me to start.:  3 VAXDWMOTMUP01_073 DECwindows MUP, No CERT advisory.8    ALPSMUP01_070  No CERT advisory.  J > Step two.  Name any opensource product that is now available on VMS for I > which an exploit was discovered that could be used to compromise a VMS wJ > system (or even provide a means to make a DoS attack against it).  I am F > aware of one, but that was in a product that no one concerned about C > security would ever run.  Remember, the fact that an exploit was  I > discovered does NOT necesarily mean that the exploit could actually be P > used against a VMS system. > K > I'm calling you on your bluff.  You claim the security concerns with VMS n; > tend to get obfuscated.  Trot 'em out and show 'em to us.  >  > Mark Berrymana >    ------------------------------   Date: 14 Jan 2004 07:26:28 GMT2 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>( Subject: Re: VAX architecture and Charon5 Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-Hs2bHgj6HB1d@localhost>t  " On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:30:32 UTC, < koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:  i > In article <581e27da.0401121003.5d2e8bc0@posting.google.com>, davis@xlnsystems.com (John Davis) writes:o > > Bob, > > H > > I would be happy to help you address any concerns you have regardingI > > CHARON-VAX for your environment.  We are working with Crane for their-G > > implementation.  What kind of system, appication and environment dov
 > > you have?d > I >    Need to service interrupts from custom hardware via DR11-WA to user oN >    level and back ever 100ms in about 10ms.  Missing interrupt is failure.  ; >    VMS 6.1, DEC C, VAX C, Fortran-77, VAX 4000 Model 500.l > ? >    Need to connect to custom hardware via DRQ3B.  25ms timing A >    requirement.  Task level I/O request flushes the FIFO every SG >     second with side effect of cancelling and restarting all pending.G >    I/O to the DRQ3B.  VMS 5.5-2, Ada 85, DEC C, Fortran-77, VAX 4000 s >    Model 500.u   Bob F           when researching the possibility of using Charon-VAX for oneF of our applications, I noticed  a reference to a DRQ3B equivalent PCI D card, on SRI's page. I even proposed it for last years's budget but & have been too busy to take it forward.  E The card itself was manufactured a compamy in California. I'm sure I  : saved the page somewhere but can't find it a t the moment.   -- r Cheers - Dave.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:12:11 +0800r, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>( Subject: Re: VAX architecture and Charon- Message-ID: <87ad4qy5z8.fsf@prep.synonet.com>0  * robison_m@crane.navy.mil (Zspider) writes:  B > We are gearing up for an attempt to replace a MicroVAX with a PCA > running the Charon VAX emulator software.  The VAX is in a testnC > environment and it controls a lot of instrumentation, so we'll bei' > running a PCI-to-QBus card in the PC.c   Who does the PCI-Qbus stuff?   -- r< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:17:26 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) ( Subject: Re: VAX architecture and Charon3 Message-ID: <SFKeXKh4HgQ4@eisner.encompasserve.org>d  j In article <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-Hs2bHgj6HB1d@localhost>, "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow> writes: >  > Bob H >           when researching the possibility of using Charon-VAX for oneH > of our applications, I noticed  a reference to a DRQ3B equivalent PCI F > card, on SRI's page. I even proposed it for last years's budget but ( > have been too busy to take it forward. > G > The card itself was manufactured a compamy in California. I'm sure I h< > saved the page somewhere but can't find it a t the moment.  F    I've seen references to the hardware components.  One company makesF    a Qbus PCI adapter and Qbus DRV11-W and DRQ3B look-alikes.  AnotherD    company makes a single PCI card that will emulate DR11-B, DR11-W,    DRV11-W, or DRQ3B.3  +    It's the timing I'm not willing to risk.n   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:18:15 -08001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris)S( Subject: Re: VAX architecture and Charon= Message-ID: <cf15391e.0401140918.4c3410c8@posting.google.com>h  o "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow> wrote in message news:<DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-Hs2bHgj6HB1d@localhost>...aH >           when researching the possibility of using Charon-VAX for oneH > of our applications, I noticed  a reference to a DRQ3B equivalent PCI F > card, on SRI's page. I even proposed it for last years's budget but ( > have been too busy to take it forward. > G > The card itself was manufactured a compamy in California. I'm sure I e< > saved the page somewhere but can't find it a t the moment.  J Perhaps you're thinking of The Logical Company, http://www.logical-co.com/   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:40:21 GMTB2 From: "Robert Boers" <Robert.boers@softresint.com>( Subject: Re: VAX architecture and Charon* Message-ID: <40057f02$1@news.deckpoint.ch>  J The BCI 3104 PCI to Qbus adapter is made by 'The Logical Company", Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA., www.logical-co.com  = It allows the connection of Qbus peripherals to a PCI bus. IndG CHARON-VAX/Industrial there is an option to integrate the physical Qbuse5 peripherals connected this way with the emulated VAX.>  L Running VAX/VMS on CHARON-VAX,  these peripherals work with the standard VMSF device drivers. No conversion, and the connection is transparent; i.e.; CHARON-VAX does not need to be told what the device(s) are.s   - Robert    9 "Paul Repacholi" <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote in messageo' news:87ad4qy5z8.fsf@prep.synonet.com...>, > robison_m@crane.navy.mil (Zspider) writes: > D > > We are gearing up for an attempt to replace a MicroVAX with a PCC > > running the Charon VAX emulator software.  The VAX is in a testlE > > environment and it controls a lot of instrumentation, so we'll beg) > > running a PCI-to-QBus card in the PC.d >e > Who does the PCI-Qbus stuff? >a > --> > Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,9 > +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.oB >                                              West Australia 6076, > comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot0 > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.H > EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:37:56 +0000 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>W* Subject: Re: VMS runs well on HP Superdome0 Message-ID: <bu3d74$lbi$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Keith Parris wrote:o > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<btjghu$3l4$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  > 7 >>Take OpenVMS, your quarterly revenue for Alphaserversy4 >>running OpenVMS is ~65 million dollars, with ~1500 >>units. >  > F > IDC Quarterly Server Tracker data for Q3CY2003 says $75M in customer6 > revenues, which I've corrected you on twice already. >   / Really how odd because my copy says $64 million25 for Q3CY2003 so you can keep on correcting me as muchk as you like.     > 3 >>This is an average after discount of 43K per unit10 >>or put another way the average number of CPU's3 >>in an AlphaServer running OpenVMS is 2, you arn'tc6 >>even in ES45 territory which is ~110K after discount >>for the ES45 with 4 CPU's. >  > D > The average is pretty useless as an indicator of _typical_ systemsH > sold -- for the average price of $50K per server ($75M/1507) you couldA > buy an awful lot of DS15s, and not come close to touching a 64peH > GS1280.  The majority of those 1,507 estimated units are probably DS15C > class uniprocessors, DS25s, and so forth, but with some number ofmD > ES45s, ES47s, ES80s and even a few 64-processor GS1280s included. G > Since IDC Quarterly Server Tracker data is for initial purchases onlysF > (upgrades are not included)), the majority of SMP systems bought are; > probably not fully populated, leaving room for expansion.  >    You are wriggling.   > 7 >>If it becomes a commodity it will be because Dell ands6 >>IBM get behind it and sell large quantities of IA-644 >>based servers and if this happens then HP will not4 >>be able to charge a premium for the Itanium server% >>platform on which OpenVMS will run.  >  > H > Oh, no! You've figured out HP's secret plan -- same HW price for a box4 > whether it runs Windows, Linux, HP-UX, or OpenVMS. >   . Ahh but then you have to compete with Dell and" that measn you fail to make money.  B > All the better for OpenVMS customers, and something they've been > asking us for for many years.n >  > 7 Of course assuming that Dell enters the market properlyt3 and drives your current pricing down by ~2 which is  closer to the market rate.  2 Otherwise your customers will still be paying over1 the odds for what will be proprietary technology.o  0 >>HP has a track record of failing to make money4 >>competing with in particular Dell in the commodity0 >>server and desktop market. Replacing IA32 with2 >>IA64 is a technology change not a change in HP's/ >>business model and won't in the low end spacee, >>have any impact on HP's ability to compete. >>with Dell who already undercut HP with their >>IA64 server(s).  >  > $ > One could readily re-word this as: > D > Sun has a track record of failing to make money competing with, inH > particular, Linux-on-Intel from HP, IBM & Dell in the commodity serverG > and desktop market.  Replacing SPARC with AMD Opteron is a technologyaA > change, not a change in Sun's business model, and won't, in theeF > low-end space, have any impact on Sun's ability to compete with IBM,: > HP, and Dell servers who already undercut Sun with their > Linux-on-Intel servers.r > < But then you know thats BS. Sun had one unprofitable quarter8 in its entire history up to the recesion and the dot com crash.  ; HP on the other hand brought Carly on board for a number of99 reasons but one was to turn arround the PC and Enterprise 8 Systems businesses in HP which were doing poorly and had for the last decade.  8 Nor is your analysis of pricing very good, the 2 way Sun7 SPARC servers are about the same price as a 2 way intel = box from HP, in fact they are cheaper if you want a supportedu OS on  the Intel boxes.   ; As always your perceptions and reality are adrift, its justc- a shame you have to base your points on them.- >  >>OpenVMS currently doesn't3 >>scale to more than 16 CPU's@ >  > E > Oracle's recent 32-way results with Oracle Rdb on a GS1280 indicaten > otherwise.F > OpenVMS had made great strides in SMP scalability in 7.3, 7.3-1, and* > now 7.3-2, as many customers can attest. >   / Ohhh come on Keith, the benchmark shows nothings2 of the sort, it shows for a very specific database1 operation OpenVMS scales. It tells you absolutely . nothing about database scalability in general.     > ' >>With OpenVMS's clustering capabilitesu$ >>the most obvious platform would be" >>clusters of 2-4 way IA64 servers >  >   > Which many customers will buy. >   ( Which if they do you will lose money on.   > " >>which if they become a commodity >>HP will not make money on. >>$ >>So I repeat why on earth would you% >>want to sell hardware. You are much # >>more likely to make a return fromt
 >>selling SW.d >  > G > HP will continue to make (small) amounts of money on the servers, and E > continue to make goodly amounts on storage, OpenVMS itself, layeredaH > software products (including that excellent Clustering you mentioned), > and Services.a >   8 This is untrue, HP does not make money on servers period@ they do not currently cover the cost of developing, building and? selling them. The small amount of money you refer to HP serversa@ making does not include the R&D costs for the servers or had you- forgotten that piece of cost center juggling.g  > Get your facts right, at the moment what ever you are actuallyB aiming to do with your marketing BS is backfiring horribly because  of your disregard for the facts.   RegardsN Andrew Harrisonn   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.027 ************************