1 INFO-VAX	Wed, 24 Aug 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 471       Contents: Re: Best VAX web server  Re: Best VAX web server  Re: Best VAX web server J Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run  VMS!P Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run  VMS! run  I Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run VMS! I Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run VMS! P Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run VMS! VMS!VMP Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run VMS! VMS!VM Re: encryption for backup * Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?* Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha?; HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2 ? Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2 ? Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2 ? Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2 ? Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2 ? Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2 ? Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2 ! Intel CEO has no time for Itanium ! Intel redeploys Itanium engineers . MMS V3.5 v. ODS5: Unexpected case-sensitivity?( Re: Next project, C programming problem.( Re: Next project, C programming problem.( Re: Next project, C programming problem. Re: RAM ! Re: Simh. How to triple the speed ! Re: Simh. How to triple the speed ! Re: Simh. How to triple the speed ! Re: Simh. How to triple the speed ! Re: Simh. How to triple the speed ! Re: Simh. How to triple the speed ! Re: Simh. How to triple the speed ! Re: Simh. How to triple the speed ! Re: Simh. How to triple the speed   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 22:40:51 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing)  Subject: Re: Best VAX web server6 Message-ID: <00A48B81.8108160E@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  f In article <tkMOe.11583$jr4.420@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net> writes:A >What's the best option these days for a free web server on VAX?    O WASD is the most-vigorously-updated and probably most performant server on VAX. K OSU is also a good choice.  There's no SWS port for VAX, although you could  try to compile the source.  
 >Also was G >DEC's port  of Netscape Navigator Gold the last available VAX browser?     B I _think_ MOSAIC (which George Cook keeps up to date) runs on VAX.  K As to POP/IMAP, I'd use the Multinet hobby license and go for that.  (I use O PMDF IMAP at SSRL, but there's no hobby/edu license for it, and the main reason N I use it is that it has persistent processes, so we're not spining up hundredsL of new processes every few miinutes.  I'm assuming your emulated VAX will be0 single user, so Multinet IMAP ought to be fine.)   -- Alan    ------------------------------   Date: 23 Aug 05 19:24:20 EDT) From: cook@wvnvms.wvnet.edu (George Cook)   Subject: Re: Best VAX web server! Message-ID: <ES4LqLeKhSIu@wvnvms>   f In article <tkMOe.11583$jr4.420@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net> writes:K > What's the best option these days for a free web server on VAX? Also was  H > DEC's port  of Netscape Navigator Gold the last available VAX browser?  F The current release (3.8-1) of VMS Mosaic runs on all VMS systems fromH VAX/VMS V5.4-3 to OpenVMS IA64 V8.2-1.  All versions of DECwindows MotifG from 1.1 onward are supported, and it will work with any TCP/IP package H other than Fusion.  It doesn't support Java, Javascript or style sheets.B It can be used with either HP SSL or OpenSSL for secure connection= support.  On VAX it can be built using DEC C, VAX C or GNU C.   H The VMS Mosaic home page is http://vaxa.wvnet.edu/vmswww/vms_mosaic.html     George Cook  WVNET    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:27:41 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>   Subject: Re: Best VAX web server, Message-ID: <430BCD0B.1EC48C1C@teksavvy.com>   Alan Greig wrote:  > B > What's the best option these days for a free web server on VAX?   + OSU Web server. The best !  (version 3.10 )   J (OK WASD fans, this probably as religious an issue as TPU vs EDT or TECO).    	 >Also was H > DEC's port  of Netscape Navigator Gold the last available VAX browser?  7 There is also MOSAIC version 3.8. No javascript though.   F > And how about best options for pop3 and imap while I'm at it? If I'mG > going to play with an emulated VAX I might as well have it loaded up!     & pop3 server comes with TCPIP SERVICES.  E IMAP comes with TCPIP Services 5.3, but backup the executables if you E apply patches because ECO 2 breaks the IMAP server on VAX VMS.  (IMAP # server is there but not supported).    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:56:05 -0400 2 From: "Jonathan Boswell" <jsb.NOSP@M.cdrh.fda.gov>S Subject: Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run  VMS! 2 Message-ID: <H3MOe.360$n5.706@mencken.net.nih.gov>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message& news:430B6191.732C64C0@teksavvy.com...B > Where "GUI" can help data entry though is with colour and larger characters.   L What?  You mean you're a young whipper snapper who has never seen the beautyL of double-height double-width characters on a real VTn40?  You can even makeH a reasonable facsimile of the old d|g|i|t|a|l logo on them.  Or go crazyL with alternating reverse-video and flashing attributes.  Ahhh...  Those were	 the days.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:34:23 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> Y Subject: Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run  VMS! run   0 Message-ID: <11gmuagi4ov8paa@corp.supernews.com>   JF Mezei wrote:  > dooleys@snowy.net.au wrote:  > < >>If you look at the way people work in most run-of-the-mill9 >>business environments eg. purchasing, sales, invoicing, < >>receipting etc. then all a mouse does is slow things down.7 >>They want to use the mouse to switch screens/systems, ; >>but anything that interrupts keyboard entry is lost time.  >  >  > H > Correct, but it becomes very difficult to pitch a character-cell basedB > application to customers these days even if it is a better, moreF > efficient solution.  Very large data entry shops though realise thisJ > because to them, the productivity of data entry staff is very important. > N > Where "GUI" can help data entry though is with colour and larger characters. > G > the other issue is that PCs are ubiquitous whereas terminals are not.   H At the point in time when everyone was clammoring to have a PC on their I desk, it was demonstrated to all, users and management, in more than one  B customer site, that for heads down order entry the character call F interface was much faster.  In all but one location, at that time, it F didn't matter.  The PC was viewed by many users as a 'perk', and they  didn't want to be left out.   F There is an axiom in application systems.  If the users want even the D worst application to succeed, they will make it happen, and, if the F users want a system to fail, even a perfect application, it will fail.   The users got what they wanted.   I Ok, as with most things reality falls somewhere in the middle of the two  I extremes.  The PC allows office automation tools to be used, and to some  D degree users can be more productive when they have more tools.  For G those who would pay the price, a nice big monitor is helpful.  A VT420  B screen is rather small.  At many sites SmarTerm or other terminal G emulators were used, and the display of the terminal screen was better  	 (bigger).   F For one application, at multiple sites, just getting the PC and using D terminal emulators along with other productivity tools actually did % improve both morale and productivity.   D Unfortunately, there were sites that thought the user interface was G everything, and VMS applications were replaced with wintel systems and  I applications.  Thus the fall of VMS at too many sites.  Also the fall of   what had been a decent career.  > Today, it doesn't surprise me that some are again looking for E efficiency.  That and the mouse just don't go together.  I never had  H problems until I began using a mouse.  Now I have to be careful, or out  come the wrist braces.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 22:19:59 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing)R Subject: Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run VMS!6 Message-ID: <00A48B7E.96C3BB8B@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  ^ In article <1124802184.637675.78910@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, bob@instantwhip.com writes:  H >our office still uses word11 along with the goldfax package extensivelyA >because it is easy to use and it works for letters and faxes ... 	 >anything 8 >else that needs automated is done by good old dibol ...    G So, seriously, does your office ever hire a new person?  How do they do  learning Word-11?    -- Alan    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 18:43:22 -0700 From: bob@instantwhip.com R Subject: Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run VMS!B Message-ID: <1124847802.078416.29030@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>  A learning word11 is easy ... just plop a help grid on the keyboard B and they are flying in just a few weeks ... word11 along w/goldfax= and other dec software is vms friendly which makes it easy to > give any user what they want ... I have never had a project or& request which I couldn't do on vms ...   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:49:07 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> Y Subject: Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run VMS! VMS!VM , Message-ID: <430B6191.732C64C0@teksavvy.com>   dooleys@snowy.net.au wrote:  > < > If you look at the way people work in most run-of-the-mill9 > business environments eg. purchasing, sales, invoicing, < > receipting etc. then all a mouse does is slow things down.7 > They want to use the mouse to switch screens/systems, ; > but anything that interrupts keyboard entry is lost time.     F Correct, but it becomes very difficult to pitch a character-cell based@ application to customers these days even if it is a better, moreD efficient solution.  Very large data entry shops though realise thisH because to them, the productivity of data entry staff is very important.  L Where "GUI" can help data entry though is with colour and larger characters.  E the other issue is that PCs are ubiquitous whereas terminals are not.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:58:58 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> Y Subject: Re: Cerner hopefully is using Zotob to show why hospitals should run VMS! VMS!VM , Message-ID: <430B63E0.6648137F@teksavvy.com>  
 bob wrote:  F > try this on for size ... our users hate mouses!  I hate mouses! They > slowB > us down!  I can do anything at the vms command level faster than > winsloze ...    D cut/paste on decwindows is a great productivity tool. The ability toA doubleclick on a file name and paste it after a command is really G valuable for instance (especially when dealing with weird and wonderful  long file names).   H One need to be reasonable with the mouse. It isn't ALL bad. But like allE things, it can be abused. Requiring a user to switch betwene keyboard ! and mouse repeatedly is very bad.   H This is similar to the PSION 3 vs PSION 5 PDAs. TRhe 3 was all keyboard.H the 5 was mixture of keyboard and touch screen. And it is a real pain toH switch from keyboard, use the pen to tap on the screen, stow the pen andG continue typing again. Looked great when making sales presentation, but C in the end, the series 3 has better usability and fewer keystrokes.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:14:09 +0300 7 From: "Guy Peleg" <guy.peleg@remove_this_header@hp.com> " Subject: Re: encryption for backup, Message-ID: <430b6773$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>  * <JimStrehlow@data911.com> wrote in message= news:1124743370.561929.132860@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... 3 > I am interested in OpenVMS ENCRYPTION for BACKUP. H > I might test the product to recommend to some of our customers who may > be interested. >  > I noticed a Nov. 2004 article 8 > http://www.openvms.org/phorum/read.php?f=5&i=356&t=356 > C > How accurate is the reported problem with encrypting/decrypting a  > BACKUP save_set? > Has that been fixed?8 > Do YOU use Encryption for OpenVMS on backup save_sets? >   C Support for encrypting backup saveset is integrated into the BACKUP F utility. I'm not sure why the sequence mentioned in the problem report9 fails, however if you'd like to encrypt your savesets use  $BACKUP/ENCRYPT.  8 With the next version of the O/S BACKUP will support AES encryption.   ; And last but not least, ENCRYPT is free if your are running  V8.2   Guy    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:13:28 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? , Message-ID: <430B6745.4FDC95AC@teksavvy.com>   david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: L > If IA64 is going to be retired then the sooner it is announced the better.  @ Don't expect an announcement until 2007, or end of Pa-Risc salesG whichever comes first. And if there are still 2 years woth of potential F IA64 sales, then customers who buy now still get some value from theirG ia64 things. Remember that from the HP point of view, moving from alpha A to IA64 is just a simple move the files and recompile. They doN,t H cosnider the rest of the trouble customers have to go through for such a platform change.      H > The last thing VMS needs is for people to have followed HPs assurancesG > and migrated to IA64 only to have the rug pulled out from under them.   F If I were Hurd, I woudln't have problems announcing the death of IA64,G but it would have to be combined with commitment to continue to provide G speed bumps to both Alpha, Mips and Pa-Risc until the 8086 is ready for  prime time enterprise systems.  G Hurd is now is a great position to make such an announcement, being new G at the job and not having to defend previous decisions he made. But the H longer he waits, the lharder it becomes for him to admit IA64 just isn't working out commercially.       J > The big difference between Alpha and IA64 is the number really using the > platform.   B That is a fair point. People are now resisting IA64 because of theE trouble of moving combined with the uncertaintly of the platform. But G some have defected to the IA64 for a variety of reasons. (remember that 4 Compaq promised very sweet deals to some customers).    L > HP may have to support those VMS IA64 systems into the future but how longJ > will third-parties be willing to continue updating their products on the > platform.   C Those ISVs who have been convinced to port to IA64 will continue to G support that platform until, at least, VMS is comemrcially available on ; the new platform (les assume 8086 for sake of discussion).      G HP need not make a formal announcement now. Both HP and Intel last year C sent very strong messages (multiople ones in fact) that IA64 had no H future. So customers know that IA64 won't make it as "industry standard"H not "commodity" and that its niche is smaller that PA-Risc or Alpha. The writing is on the wall.   H But until they are ready to move to the 8086, they must officially stateP that IA64 continues to be their platform and that it continues to be developped.   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 11:27:53 -0700 From: bob@instantwhip.com 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? C Message-ID: <1124821673.592143.238510@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   D "frankly, it doesn't matter what the underlying architecture is - if your goal is to run VMS."  B that is the kind of attitude that so sadly is prevelant in society today.E I am paying for my sons private school because of this very attitude, G instead of A's and F's, the public schools are giving those warm touchy F feely checks for C's ... and then a kid and his parents say, "Gee, youG got a check, you passed, that's great!", and no further incentive seems F to be needed on the child to improve even though that check translatesD to a C which is average and which means the child is far from A or BF excellent work!  If DEC would have had this attitude, there would have never D have been alpha and all the other great products that left others in the D dust ... when we begin to settle for "good enough", we begin to dumb( down, and eventually become ignorant ...  G and sorry Fred, but EV7 i/o still leaves even power/itanium in the dust 	 according 6 to sandia labs, but who cares about the real world ...  D HP should now change their logo from HP INVENT to HP GOOD ENOUGH ...   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:27:25 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? , Message-ID: <430B6A89.63F311A1@teksavvy.com>   FredK wrote:? > What I see is VMS slowly building a head of steam on Itanium,   G Compared to the dead period between June 25 2001 and now, perhaps.  But < IA64 is not a viable platform in the long term because it isG proprietary, low volume and not industry standard and is now pitched as E smaller market niche than Alpha was. (and much smaller than Pa-Risc). F The 8086 is slowly (or quickly depending on whow you speak to) eroding  IA64's remaining marklet niches.    H While HP and INTEL have been ghood any not giving any evidence that IA64? wasn't viable, they have sent plenty of hints since last year.    C Also, one need not wait for a major speech from Hurd announcing the C retirement of IA64 before one can make some educated guesses on the  viability of the product.   	 > is that J > frankly, it doesn't matter what the underlying architecture is - if your > goal is to > run VMS.      G This is not true. Customers must justify their choices for platform and B OS. It is hard enough now to justify VMS as an OS because it isn'tG marketed and its future under HP isn't exactly brilliant. But having to H also justify the risk of going to IA64 when the platform isn't seen as a- long term solution is also a difficult task.    E Remember that to a customer, migrating to a different platform is far H more than just recompiling a few programs. VMS engineers may have done aD fine job at the technical level to make the technical aspects of theB port easy, but the business and management aspects aren't so easy.    B > Stay on your VAXes, even use Charon, continue to use Alphas, andB > - without fear - move to Itanium when you are ready and need to.  < The problem is that HP wants to cut Alpha sales prematurely.  D Cutting Alpha sales may help raise the percentage of IA64 revenus inH BCS, but it won't increase profits. The total sales will just go down as6 customers will buy used alphas from Island and others.    M > Is everything perfect?  What is?  But going from Alpha to Itanium on VMS is  > nearly painless and low risk.   G Agreed on the low risk: you know that within the life cycle of the IA64 G box, you'll have to untertake another platform migration, likely to the G 8086. So one knows the risk. But ideally, customers should just be able F to keep on buying Alphas until VMS is ported to a viable platform thatA doesn't have "it will be retired" image before it is commercially ) available (which was the case with IA64).     M > If you don't believe that VMS has a future, then by all means - let us help 
 > you move  > to HP-UX or Linux or Windows.   F VMS has potential for a great future. But it needs HP's help, it needsF HP's marketing and it needs to be out there in faces of people to makeD it a viable platform. Without that, VMS will remain stagnant , knownH only in small niches where the sales job is done by VMS advocates within) the customer shops, not by HP sales reps.   6 > But we think it still has a future.  If you  believeN > that x86-64 is the magic-bullet that will fix everything, my opinion is that > you are mistaken.     D Magic bullet ? No. Best solution ? NO. But the 8086 remains the onlyE solution left to HP at the point in time, both because they killed Pa G Risc and ALpha and also because opf their rethoric on the absolute need = for enterprise systems to move to industry standard commodity F architecture and reduce the number of architectures HP has to support.    L > Quite frankly, if this endless SPECULATION here stops even one reader fromL > porting to Itanium, or to leave VMS entirely - then it's done nothing good- > for  either VMS - or IMHO for the customer.   F HP doesn't care about VMS. They do care about HP-UX. And the fact thatG Pa-Risc's life has been extended is a very good sign that HP knows that E IA64 is not popular with customers. But it has nowhere to go until at D least 2007 because there is no viable replacement yet since the 80860 isn't yet ready for prime time in large systems.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:30:09 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? , Message-ID: <430B6B2D.495AB76C@teksavvy.com>   Alan Greig wrote: J >> else. Probably breaks several UK laws just in making the claim as well.J > You will note that Intel no longer call the Itanic "Industry Standard" -
 > only HP.    C HP stopped using it in its official documents (outside of VMS). For F instance, in its financial announcements, industry standard applies to8 8086 only and itanium is listed as Itanium or Integrity.   ------------------------------   Date: 23 Aug 2005 18:36:31 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? , Message-ID: <3n18lfF195jn8U1@individual.net>  3 In article <4XIOe.10835$RR7.6491@news.cpqcorp.net>, - 	"FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> writes:  > M > If you don't believe that VMS has a future, then by all means - let us help * > you move to HP-UX or Linux or Windows.    D Fred, the people who will abandon VMS because of a percieved lack ofD future will be blaming the perception on HP and are hardly likely to< trust anything from HP ever again.  "Perception is reality".   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 18:59:22 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? 3 Message-ID: <emKOe.10859$tW7.8294@news.cpqcorp.net>    OK.  This FUD has no point.   : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message& news:430B6A89.63F311A1@teksavvy.com...   > I > Agreed on the low risk: you know that within the life cycle of the IA64 I > box, you'll have to untertake another platform migration, likely to the  > 8086. So one knows the risk.   Pure fantasy & FUD  , > But ideally, customers should just be ableH > to keep on buying Alphas until VMS is ported to a viable platform thatC > doesn't have "it will be retired" image before it is commercially + > available (which was the case with IA64).  >   G The point of migrating to Itanium was to *not* have to continue to fund D new Alpha platform development.  If you have ongoing needs for AlphaE beyond the last-buy date, contact your sales rep - there is a program K available to provide that ability (guaranteed for a cost, or not-guaranteed 
 best effort).    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:12:02 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? 3 Message-ID: <6yKOe.10861$WW7.8733@news.cpqcorp.net>   < Sigh.  Look, if I had the magic wand - I wouldn't have built7 Alpha - I'd have built a very much relaxed VAX with the @ ability to run in a strict mode for compatability.  If I had the6 wand, I would have shouted "Hey, don't you think we're9 celebrating victory a little soon" when we were doing our 9 lavish DECWorlds.  If I had the wand, I'd have pushed the 7 low-end of Alpha down to really compete with x86.  If I : had the wand, I'd have cut the price of the VS2000 in half and put SUN out of business.  6 EV7 based systems are *fine* systems.  Buy them.  They< are great.  But I don't have the wand, and they *will* stand: still and not move forward.  Itanium will continue to move forward.  > My quote really is more to the fact that it really *isn't* the9 hardware architecture you care about, it's the software - 8 and if the software is VMS - then you have a solution on9 Itanium that may-or-may-not be better than an Alpha today 9 (but probably will be cheaper) and which *will* be faster 6 than Alpha tomorrow.  What you care about the hardware( is it's price, it's performance or both.  = I'm not sure if "Sandia Labs" is representative of the "real" ; world or not.  But we are happy that EV7 was a good fit for 5 their needs.  Sounds like what they needed was memory 
 bandwidth.    & <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote in message= news:1124821673.592143.238510@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... F > "frankly, it doesn't matter what the underlying architecture is - if > your > goal is to run VMS." > D > that is the kind of attitude that so sadly is prevelant in society > today.G > I am paying for my sons private school because of this very attitude, I > instead of A's and F's, the public schools are giving those warm touchy H > feely checks for C's ... and then a kid and his parents say, "Gee, youI > got a check, you passed, that's great!", and no further incentive seems H > to be needed on the child to improve even though that check translatesF > to a C which is average and which means the child is far from A or BH > excellent work!  If DEC would have had this attitude, there would have > never F > have been alpha and all the other great products that left others in > the F > dust ... when we begin to settle for "good enough", we begin to dumb* > down, and eventually become ignorant ... > I > and sorry Fred, but EV7 i/o still leaves even power/itanium in the dust  > according 8 > to sandia labs, but who cares about the real world ... > F > HP should now change their logo from HP INVENT to HP GOOD ENOUGH ... >    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 11:49:12 -0700 From: icerq4a@spray.se3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? C Message-ID: <1124822952.695390.221440@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>    JF Mezei skrev: 4 > And the fact that Pa-Risc's life has been extended  0 I am not aware of this? Not changed I would say.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:19:51 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? 3 Message-ID: <rFKOe.10865$BX7.7418@news.cpqcorp.net>   > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message& news:3n18lfF195jn8U1@individual.net...5 > In article <4XIOe.10835$RR7.6491@news.cpqcorp.net>, . > "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> writes: > > J > > If you don't believe that VMS has a future, then by all means - let us help* > > you move to HP-UX or Linux or Windows. > F > Fred, the people who will abandon VMS because of a percieved lack ofF > future will be blaming the perception on HP and are hardly likely to$ > trust anything from HP ever again.  A I have no argument with that.  There are people who never trusted ; DEC again when they dumped the DEC-10 (they congregate in a A folklore newsgroup).  There are people who never trusted us again > when the VAX was dropped, when Windows was dropped from Alpha,# when Alpha was dropped for Itanium.   > Each time we lost customers and made some people unhappy.  Not; much that can be done about it.  Ken is gone, Bob Palmer is 9 gone, Capellas is gond, Carly is gone.  We're still here.   D Do we know what is in store for the future?  Our best guess, and allF information *we* have is that Itanium will continue to be our strategyB going forward.  Many customers and ISV's believe it and are moving forward with their plans.    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:04:37 GMT ( From: Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net>3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? < Message-ID: <9rKOe.11546$jr4.6035@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>   bob@instantwhip.com wrote:  I > and sorry Fred, but EV7 i/o still leaves even power/itanium in the dust  > according 8 > to sandia labs, but who cares about the real world ...  G If we had the 2Ghz EV79 shipping today and the EV8 already in the labs  F there really would be no competition. That's, I think, about where we @ should have been by now according to my recollection of a DECUS @ VMS/Alpha update not long before the Alphacide. A number of VMS & engineers were present including Hoff.  F > HP should now change their logo from HP INVENT to HP GOOD ENOUGH ... >    --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:48:16 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? 3 Message-ID: <44LOe.10868$BX7.2980@news.cpqcorp.net>   = If we had a 3GHz VAX shipping today, there really would be no @ competition - and we'd still be called DEC (some might say if we+ had a 3GHz DECsystem-10 shipping today...).       5 "Alan Greig" <greigaln@netscape.net> wrote in message 6 news:9rKOe.11546$jr4.6035@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk... >  >  > bob@instantwhip.com wrote: > K > > and sorry Fred, but EV7 i/o still leaves even power/itanium in the dust 
 > > according : > > to sandia labs, but who cares about the real world ... > H > If we had the 2Ghz EV79 shipping today and the EV8 already in the labsG > there really would be no competition. That's, I think, about where we A > should have been by now according to my recollection of a DECUS A > VMS/Alpha update not long before the Alphacide. A number of VMS ( > engineers were present including Hoff. > H > > HP should now change their logo from HP INVENT to HP GOOD ENOUGH ... > >  >  > --   > Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:52:32 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? 0 Message-ID: <11gmvci4fjblj93@corp.supernews.com>   FredK wrote:- > <david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk> wrote in message % > news:defgom$1hf$1@news.mdx.ac.uk...  > 7 >>In article <430A1187.7DEC071E@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei  > ( > <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: > % >>>susan_skonetski@hotmail.com wrote:  >>> J >>>>The article on the Inquirer is pure rumor please ignore it, it is justH >>>>wasting everyone's time.  I promise if I hear anything I will let my >>>>distribution lists know. >  >  > F >>>Right now, the speculation about IA64's retirement is just based on >>>context/circumstances.  >  > G > Here we are with the only kernel of enlightenment.  SPECULATION based N > on little more than a lazy columnist's half thought out SPECULATION probablyN > because it's August and there isn't any real news for him to stumble across. > L > Do you have a shred of evidence of any form that Intel or HP is abandoningN > Itanium for any other strategy for it's high-end server platforms?  No.  ButK > what we do have is a bunch of people still brooding over Alpha and trying H > to find any reason to hope Itanium fails.  We have a smallish group ofN > true experts who dislike the architecture (but who will hold their noses forK > the most part about x86-64's lack of elegance).  Or will split fine hairs  > about M > which already fast system is slightly faster than the other, or if not what  > the G > speed to power ratio is, or if Intel has lived up to every prediction 
 > (regardless ; > of if it was actually their *own* predictions or Intels).  > C > What I see is VMS slowly building a head of steam on Itanium, and 
 > performance L > that is at par or better on most Itanium platforms than Alpha.  What I see	 > is that J > frankly, it doesn't matter what the underlying architecture is - if your > goal is toL > run VMS.  Stay on your VAXes, even use Charon, continue to use Alphas, andB > - without fear - move to Itanium when you are ready and need to. > M > Is everything perfect?  What is?  But going from Alpha to Itanium on VMS is  > nearly painless and low risk.  > M > If you don't believe that VMS has a future, then by all means - let us help 
 > you moveL > to HP-UX or Linux or Windows.  But we think it still has a future.  If you	 > believe N > that x86-64 is the magic-bullet that will fix everything, my opinion is that	 > you are K > mistaken.  If you think we have some team working on a VMS port, then you H > need to check your medications.  If you think there is a plan afoot to > revive Alpha! > -- then I'm frankly speechless.  > L > Quite frankly, if this endless SPECULATION here stops even one reader fromL > porting to Itanium, or to leave VMS entirely - then it's done nothing good > for ( > either VMS - or IMHO for the customer.  H I agree with everything you write.  VMS is the environment that matters $ to people, not the HW behind the OS.  G I will throw in the comment of "It's about time" concerning the itanic  G matching or bettering Alpha performance.  2005, almost 2006 technology  : against 2001 technology?  But that's not really the issue.  G I really hope that IA-64 remains available, because I really hope that  I VMS remains available.  That's basically where you're coming from also I   believe.  H But having seen 'the impossible' happen before, I'm not blind to what's I happening with CPUs.  At least Alpha was under the control of the owners  D of VMS.  Not so the itanic.  I doubt that HP would dump the itanic. F Right or wrong, they have too many eggs in that basket.  And it's not F just products, as you rightly point out, baseless speculation doesn't 
 help anybody.   G Intel is another company, that will do what they feel they have to do,  D and as history has shown, he who is in last place will be the first F taken by the devil.  I have seen Intel scale back their plans for the I itanic, and I can envision them possibly scaling back to zero.  This one  F possibility is the single biggest error in the cancelling (murder) of : Alpha.  (Had to throw the 'M' word in, just for you.)  :-)  A With respect to CPUs, I no longer have faith in 'something being   impossible'.  F Also, try to remember, it's not just people who are upset over losing E Alpha that have concerns for the long term survival of itanic.  This  2 isn't just about some small group of vocal losers.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:13:27 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? 0 Message-ID: <11gn0jp1hc0jvea@corp.supernews.com>  H Ok, Fred thinks JF is FUD, and he's partially (mainly) right.  However, B even in a manure pile there still can be something besides manure.   JF Mezei wrote:  > FredK wrote: > ? >>What I see is VMS slowly building a head of steam on Itanium,  >  > I > Compared to the dead period between June 25 2001 and now, perhaps.  But > > IA64 is not a viable platform in the long term because it isI > proprietary, low volume and not industry standard and is now pitched as G > smaller market niche than Alpha was. (and much smaller than Pa-Risc). H > The 8086 is slowly (or quickly depending on whow you speak to) eroding" > IA64's remaining marklet niches.  G There is the question of 'compared to what'.  From 6-25-2001 until now  H isn't much of a standard to measure against.  But, now is where we are, ( and advancing is better than retreating.  J > While HP and INTEL have been ghood any not giving any evidence that IA64A > wasn't viable, they have sent plenty of hints since last year.   > E > Also, one need not wait for a major speech from Hurd announcing the E > retirement of IA64 before one can make some educated guesses on the  > viability of the product.  >  > 	 >>is that J >>frankly, it doesn't matter what the underlying architecture is - if your >>goal is to >>run VMS.   >  >  > I > This is not true. Customers must justify their choices for platform and D > OS. It is hard enough now to justify VMS as an OS because it isn'tI > marketed and its future under HP isn't exactly brilliant. But having to J > also justify the risk of going to IA64 when the platform isn't seen as a/ > long term solution is also a difficult task.   > G > Remember that to a customer, migrating to a different platform is far J > more than just recompiling a few programs. VMS engineers may have done aF > fine job at the technical level to make the technical aspects of theD > port easy, but the business and management aspects aren't so easy.  G This is the area that just won't go away.  For many years, the biggest  H push for VMS came from current users.  Look at the failure of palmer to H kill it in favor of MS.  These loyal and dedicated users would not give D up on VMS regardless of what anyone else did or said.  These people ? believed the promises about Alpha.  These people put their own  K reputation and credibility on the line for VMS.  These people were shafted.   H Excepting Rob, can you name even one of these people who will put their D reputation and credibility (whatever they have left) on the line to F advocate moving to IA-64?  I'm not talking about accepting that path, H I'm talking about arguing for VMS when their employeers are considering H a different path.  And I wonder if even Rob would stick his neck out on 	 that one.   G That's what June 25, 2001 cost VMS.  The former advocates for VMS will  3 only say "you're on your own".  Can they be blamed?    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:18:04 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? / Message-ID: <11gn0se1c7dnb3@corp.supernews.com>    bob@instantwhip.com wrote:F > "frankly, it doesn't matter what the underlying architecture is - if > your > goal is to run VMS." > D > that is the kind of attitude that so sadly is prevelant in society > today.G > I am paying for my sons private school because of this very attitude, I > instead of A's and F's, the public schools are giving those warm touchy H > feely checks for C's ... and then a kid and his parents say, "Gee, youI > got a check, you passed, that's great!", and no further incentive seems H > to be needed on the child to improve even though that check translatesF > to a C which is average and which means the child is far from A or BH > excellent work!  If DEC would have had this attitude, there would have > never F > have been alpha and all the other great products that left others in > the F > dust ... when we begin to settle for "good enough", we begin to dumb* > down, and eventually become ignorant ... > I > and sorry Fred, but EV7 i/o still leaves even power/itanium in the dust  > according 8 > to sandia labs, but who cares about the real world ... > F > HP should now change their logo from HP INVENT to HP GOOD ENOUGH ... >   F I just don't know what to say.  This is too much for me.  Did he hire  someone to write his posts?   0 Bob has discovered the shift key.  (Not totally)   Bob is making sensible points.   ???????????????    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 15:54:11 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? 3 Message-ID: <ihyEiGq2K2xQ@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <44LOe.10868$BX7.2980@news.cpqcorp.net>, "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> writes: > ? > If we had a 3GHz VAX shipping today, there really would be no 
 > competition   @ Actually I think there would be, since VAX patents have expired.   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 15:00:04 -0700# From: "WhoDat?" <whohe@whoever.com> 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? B Message-ID: <1124834404.429340.42630@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:b > In article <44LOe.10868$BX7.2980@news.cpqcorp.net>, "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> writes: > > A > > If we had a 3GHz VAX shipping today, there really would be no  > > competition  > B > Actually I think there would be, since VAX patents have expired.  C I would imagine that many new patents would have been issued as the G technology advanced. If someone wants to use 20 year old stuff to build B a new CPU, then, let them. Noone is going to want any still viableF patent-expired IP unless there's a market for a competing product, andB if there is a market that would mean that VAX has been successful.  F VAX, like any other CPU family, isn't about what it's made from or how& it's made as long as it runs the code.  D I think a 3GHz VAX would be a marvelous thing to behold! What if allB that Alpha and IA64 time and money had gone into VAX32/64 instead?F Imagine all of the software that would run on it by now and all of the! ISV's that would still be around?   ? Look at X86 today and compare it to the X86 of '78 or so. Would E evolving a state-of-the-art VAX really be harder to do than inventing " Alpha and now reinventing Itanium?  7 Darn. Playing what-if really is depressing sometimes:-|    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 18:36:27 -0400 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? = Message-ID: <ZJmdnTAAD_xxOZbeRVn-jQ@metrocastcablevision.com>    FredK wrote:   ...   L > Do you have a shred of evidence of any form that Intel or HP is abandoningI > Itanium for any other strategy for it's high-end server platforms?  No.   F In point of fact, yes, we do.  Not conclusive evidence, but certainly E considerably more persuasive evidence than we had for Alpha's demise   prior to June 25, 2001.   I 1.  About a year ago Intel axed some significant Itanic development (its  G 'Bayshore' chipset supporting faster bus speeds, Itanic being somewhat  H choked in some applications already and soon to be far more so with the I advent of two Itanic cores per socket).  Hardly something one would seem  H likely to do to one's premier architecture that one was still trying to  get off the ground market-wise.   F 2.  About 8 months ago Intel pulled the ex-Alpha team off the Tukwila H effort, eliminating that completely new core (of which there would have C been 8 on each chip) and replacing it with yet another warmed-over  H McKinley clone (and word has it only 4 cores per chip).  I suppose it's F possible that the Alpha people really screwed up, but since they were H moved to a new super-secret project it seems at least a bit more likely G that Intel was placing them where they were most needed (and that that   was not on Itanic).   H 3.  Early this year a rumor surfaced that Intel had been encouraging HP G to port VMS to x86-64.  I frankly found that difficult to believe, but  I it came from a fairly credible source.  Now, from a completely different  D (and reportedly also fairly credible) source we hear that Intel has G asked SGI to support x86 in their Altix machines (when Itanic and Xeon  H can share a common socket and chipset in the 2007 for Xeon, though more I likely 2008 for Itanic, time-frame).  Itanic boosters have asserted that  E the coming 'common system infrastructure' (at least IIRC that's what  D 'CSI' stands for) is aimed at making it easy to migrate from x86 to G Itanic, but these alleged initiatives by Intel make it look a lot more  H like a way to migrate stranded Itanic customers to an architecture with  more of a future.   H 4.  HP has embraced Opteron surprisingly enthusiastically for a company D allegedly focused on having only a single server architecture.  One C could reasonably argue that this is a purely practical reaction to  B Intel's failure to remain competitive on the low-end server front @ lately, but it's still not the act of a company single-mindedly I dedicated to ensuring the success of the platform it claims it's betting  I its future on by suggesting that all potential competition is really not  I worth considering.  (Contrast this with IBM's stance, for example, which  G is that it's willing to sell you Opteron servers for niche uses if you  A want them and will sell you Xeon servers for 'industry-standard'  @ applications, but is clearly focused on POWER for serious work.)  G The Itanic effort is now over 11 years old at Intel (and closing in on  G 17 years old at HP).  It has consistently failed to come anywhere near  A living up to its performance goals, and apparently Montecito and  I Montvale are set to continue that tradition.  It has consistently failed  G to live up to its sales goals - its main claims to 'success' involving  I sales to customer bases at both HP and SGI which have little alternative  J given the execution of their previous (and generally preferred) platforms.  I Is it any wonder that people find it entirely credible that HP and Intel  H may be looking at CSI as a way to extricate themselves from this fiasco G without completely shafting their customers?  SGI is moving rapidly to  G Linux, which will run fully as happily on x86-64 as it does on Itanic.  E HP hasn't deprecated HP-UX yet, but seems to have expressed the idea  D that Linux could eventually supplant it.  VMS, being little-endian, E should have relatively little problem accommodating itself to x86 if  B anyone is willing to subsidize the port.  And if NSK can't, well, H there's every reason to believe that Montvale (relatively minor project I that it has become) will ship in late 2006 and that since no new core is  H involved and the surrounding on-chip support is at least to some degree F shared with x86 Tukwila may see the light of day as well (probably in 0 early 2008) before the bell tolls with finality.  C I'll remind you of the embarrassing amount of pure poppycock which  F otherwise credible ZK engineers and managers were spewing about Alpha D and future Itanics during the week or two immediately following the G Alphacide.  They likely meant well, but were in no position whatsoever  I to offer anything authoritative in that area and rather indiscriminately  D (and far too trustingly) regurgitated the spin which less estimable  sources were feeding them.  G Does that mean you're as far off base this time as they (since I don't  E remember you personally has having been nearly the worst of the lot)  H were back then?  Of course not:  it just means that you're not any more < authoritative sources this time than was the case back then.  H Time of course will tell, just as it eventually did after the Alphacide G (and for that matter before it:  quite a few of us were pretty dubious  E about Compaq's level of commitment to VMS and Alpha well before that  H event).  But for people who must make decisions *now*, knowing what the ) realistic possibilities are is important.    - bill   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 16:41:54 -0700 From: dooleys@snowy.net.au3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? C Message-ID: <1124840514.816681.173480@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>    JF Mezei wrote:   ! > david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: N > > If IA64 is going to be retired then the sooner it is announced the better. > B > Don't expect an announcement until 2007, or end of Pa-Risc salesI > whichever comes first. And if there are still 2 years woth of potential H > IA64 sales, then customers who buy now still get some value from theirI > ia64 things. Remember that from the HP point of view, moving from alpha C > to IA64 is just a simple move the files and recompile. They doN,t J > cosnider the rest of the trouble customers have to go through for such a > platform change. >  > J > > The last thing VMS needs is for people to have followed HPs assurancesI > > and migrated to IA64 only to have the rug pulled out from under them.  > H > If I were Hurd, I woudln't have problems announcing the death of IA64,I > but it would have to be combined with commitment to continue to provide I > speed bumps to both Alpha, Mips and Pa-Risc until the 8086 is ready for   > prime time enterprise systems.B The problem with that strategy is the fact that most organisationsA are already running their "prime time enterprise systems" on 8086 ? Most are running Windows server, quite a few running linux, and % you can even run Solaris if you want. @ There are fewer and fewer people that will pay the price premiumA to go from 99.9% uptime to 99.999% or better, and these will only ; be where there are lives or large amounts of money at risk, 8 (Emergency dispatch, air traffic control, money markets,1 stock exchanges, lotteries, mobile phone billing) 1 Just look at the stats for server sales (q3/2004)        $Billion   units* ibm    3.66      295,000  (power and 8086): hp     3.09      471,000  (of which about 20% are Itanium)! sun    1.18       81,000  (sparc) $ dell   1.17      347,000  (all 8086)   Phil   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:29:31 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 3 Subject: Re: HP to dump itanium - bring back alpha? , Message-ID: <430BCD79.DEE6C2DF@teksavvy.com>   WhoDat? wrote:; > I think a 3GHz VAX would be a marvelous thing to behold!    G Especially if it were made plug-compatible with the all mighty microvax * II so the MV-II could be upgraded to 3GHz   ' :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) ;-)    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 15:39:01 -0700! From: susan_skonetski@hotmail.com D Subject: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2C Message-ID: <1124836741.361497.301950@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Dear Newsgroup,   G This week there has been a lot of FUD around about HP and Intel and the ) commitment to the Itanium 2 architecture.   E Here is two web sites you might find useful. Please keep in mind that / these are not specific to any one organization.   "  http://www.hp.com/go/therealstory; This site contains "The Real Story about Integrity Servers"   ; http://www.hp.com/products1/itanium/testimonials/index.html D This site contains customer quotes, case studies and press releases.  B I thought this might be more useful to you than gossip, rumors andD conjecture.  We did receive yet another internal communication today= restating our commitment to this platform.  I know its not as G interesting nor does it generate as much conversation however it is the 
 reality.     Regards, Sue    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 18:58:53 -0400 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>H Subject: Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2= Message-ID: <OKednTW9mYSzN5beRVn-jA@metrocastcablevision.com>   " susan_skonetski@hotmail.com wrote: > Dear Newsgroup,  > I > This week there has been a lot of FUD around about HP and Intel and the + > commitment to the Itanium 2 architecture.   I That is of course at least technically correct, in the sense that 'fear,  2 uncertainty, and doubt' have indeed been involved.  H What would be incorrect would be to assert that there was no legitimate I reason for having raised such doubts, so I hope you're not implying that.    > G > Here is two web sites you might find useful. Please keep in mind that 1 > these are not specific to any one organization.  > $ >  http://www.hp.com/go/therealstory= > This site contains "The Real Story about Integrity Servers"  > = > http://www.hp.com/products1/itanium/testimonials/index.html F > This site contains customer quotes, case studies and press releases. > D > I thought this might be more useful to you than gossip, rumors and
 > conjecture.   G Well, that's a difficult call:  are clear statements of direction from  D an organization with a history of flagrant mendacity more, or less, , useful than (possibly informed) speculation?  ) Both probably have their uses, I suspect.   :    We did receive yet another internal communication today? > restating our commitment to this platform.  I know its not as I > interesting nor does it generate as much conversation however it is the  > reality.    G Ah, yes - reality, or at least current reality, or if not even that at   least *public* reality.   G Public reality, you'll recall, was embodied in Compaq's "Commitment to  E Alpha" letter - right up until that public reality was turned on its  E head in a single day (though interestingly enough nobody bothered to  - remove the letter for another month or more).   G Since you've seen fit to refer to these current 'commitments', it only  ; seems appropriate to revisit those of the past - see below.    - bill     To Our Valued Customers:  A Over the past few months, we have taken a close look at Compaqs  G platform strategy and the needs of our customers. We concluded that we  ? needed to simplify our strategy, more clearly define our value  E proposition for you, and reinforce our message to you that Compaq is  3 unequivocally committed to Alpha for the long term.   ; The Compaq NonStopTM server platform strategy is clear and  G straightforward. We are focused on two key segments: Industry Standard  F Servers (Compaq ProLiant) and Business Critical Servers for customers H requiring the highest levels of availability, scalability, reliability,  data integrity and security.  G As our underlying processor technology, Alpha is absolutely key to our  H profitable growth and market leadership in the Business Critical Server G segment. As a result, we are investing aggressively in multiple future  H generations of Alpha chip technology and a robust Alpha system roadmap. E Our plan is to drive Alpha at the high end of the enterprise market,  I where our strengths in 64-bit platforms, Compaq NonStopTM technology and  C clustering help you build a competitive advantage. We have already  I announced an aggressive plan to grow Tru64 UNIX on Alpha systems in such  A key markets as high performance technical computing, e-commerce,  F telecommunications and enterprise applications, among others. We will H drive Alpha volumes by leveraging the growth of Linux. We will continue H to maintain the highest levels of customer satisfaction for our OpenVMS G customers. This includes a five-year rolling roadmap and investment in  I OpenVMS in the areas of business critical capabilities and software that  H enable Compaq NonStopTM solutions. And as we also announced, Alpha will A become the engine for future generations of our Compaq NonStopTM   Himalaya systems.   D Our commitment to Alpha is a sound one that provides Compaq and our E customers with unique competitive advantages. As you know, Alpha has  I maintained its unquestioned performance leadership against all other CPU  F architectures since January 1993. We plan to maintain and extend this E lead with a fully funded R+D program to ensure continued delivery of  " leadership products to the market.  G Specifically, we are now shipping our third-generation EV6 CPU chip in  G our full line of Compaq AlphaServer systems, available today with 1 to  I 14 processors, and have begun shipping faster versions of these products  E based on the EV67 CPU chip. In addition, we have just introduced the  E AlphaServer SC series of supercomputers to extend our #1 position in  I mid-range high performance technical computing into the traditional >$1M  B supercomputer space. By early 2000, we will begin rolling out our I next-generation high-end AlphaServer with up to 32 processors. Our Alpha  B manufacturing partner, Samsung, recently publicly demonstrated an F advanced development version of the EV68 CPU chip, the first to break E the 1GHz barrier. And we have an exciting Alpha roadmap ahead of us,  F including EV7, EV8, EV9 and EV10, with a plan to offer a full line of H systems based on these generations. In EV8, we will implement a new CPU I methodology, Simultaneous Multi-Threading, which was recently introduced  4 at the MicroProcessor Forum in San Jose, California.  I With these commitments, Compaq offers the most powerful set of platforms  H and the widest range of choices to deliver the greatest value for you  H from Windows NT on our ProLiant servers and Professional Workstations . J . . to Tru64 UNIX, Linux and OpenVMS on Alpha . . . to NonStopTM Himalaya.  H We appreciate your business, we value our relationship with you, and we ? look forward to building an even stronger partnership together.   
 Sincerely,  	 Bill Heil   	 Bill Heil " Vice President and General Manager! Business Critical Server Division    Jesse Lipcon   Jesse Lipcon Vice President Alpha Technology   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 22:24:21 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> H Subject: Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2, Message-ID: <430BDA4F.55231F31@teksavvy.com>  " susan_skonetski@hotmail.com wrote:D > I thought this might be more useful to you than gossip, rumors andF > conjecture.  We did receive yet another internal communication today? > restating our commitment to this platform.  I know its not as I > interesting nor does it generate as much conversation however it is the 
 > reality.  E Sue, first, it is good to see you reply more agressively to rumours.    C Compaq had made public commitments to Alpha while Capellas was busy  planning its murder.A Then, Compaq kills Alpha and makes commitments to keep it on life F support for a few years with EV7 and a process shrink later. It didn't honour those commitments.   ? From our point of view, we have learned not to bet our lives on C "commitments" by a computer vendor with a history of breaking them.   E Furthermore, long term strategic decisions on IA64 would be made at a J very high level and in this case, would involve CEOs of both HP and Intel.  E So the fact that HP is making statements about its commitment to IA64 D does not preclude it having long term strategic plans to abandon theH platform. And they can honestly make commitments today even if they know1 that by 2007, they will announce the end of IA64.   E Furthermore, it is also possible that such longer term strategies are C not yet finalised and require more negotiations between the CEOs of G Intel and HP to negotiate details of funding etc. During this time, the D official company line remains "we are committed to that IA64 thing".      H Sue, VMS is at the mercy of HP and Intel. The FUD isn't directed at VMS, it is directed at HP and Intel.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 22:59:39 -0400 - From: William Webb <william.w.webb@gmail.com> H Subject: Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 27 Message-ID: <8660a3a1050823195934d240ca@mail.gmail.com>   5 On 8/23/05, Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote: $ > susan_skonetski@hotmail.com wrote: > > Dear Newsgroup,  > > K > > This week there has been a lot of FUD around about HP and Intel and the - > > commitment to the Itanium 2 architecture.  >=20J > That is of course at least technically correct, in the sense that 'fear,4 > uncertainty, and doubt' have indeed been involved. >=20I > What would be incorrect would be to assert that there was no legitimate K > reason for having raised such doubts, so I hope you're not implying that.  >=20 > > I > > Here is two web sites you might find useful. Please keep in mind that 3 > > these are not specific to any one organization.  > > & > >  http://www.hp.com/go/therealstory? > > This site contains "The Real Story about Integrity Servers"  > > ? > > http://www.hp.com/products1/itanium/testimonials/index.html H > > This site contains customer quotes, case studies and press releases. > > F > > I thought this might be more useful to you than gossip, rumors and > > conjecture.  >=20H > Well, that's a difficult call:  are clear statements of direction fromE > an organization with a history of flagrant mendacity more, or less, . > useful than (possibly informed) speculation? >=20+ > Both probably have their uses, I suspect.  >=20< >    We did receive yet another internal communication todayA > > restating our commitment to this platform.  I know its not as K > > interesting nor does it generate as much conversation however it is the  > > reality. >=20H > Ah, yes - reality, or at least current reality, or if not even that at > least *public* reality.  >=20H > Public reality, you'll recall, was embodied in Compaq's "Commitment toF > Alpha" letter - right up until that public reality was turned on itsF > head in a single day (though interestingly enough nobody bothered to/ > remove the letter for another month or more).  >=20H > Since you've seen fit to refer to these current 'commitments', it only= > seems appropriate to revisit those of the past - see below.  >=20 > - bill >=20 <snip>   Aren't you people ashamed?   Let me say this:  L Of course, Sue Skonetski is going to speak the HP line, because *that's her=  job*   L That having been said, all who have read here for any length of time know t= hat:  - Sue Skonetski does not spout lies or BS.. =20   B And I personally take offense that you, Bill would fling such dung back in her direction.  A She doesn't deserve getting flamed for actions of others that are  beyond her control.   : I refer you all back to what I said in the 2 cents thread. =20 G All this traffic began because of unsubstantiated and unsourced rumors!   C I've got a special on heavy duty tinfoil, folks, in the wide rolls.   J At some point, you've got to let the past be the past and live in the now.  D That was an action taken by a company that ceased to be post-merger.  B Would you beat up IBM for a decision made back in the 1930s by the Tabulating Machine Company?   That's what you're doing.   5 Bitching about decisions made by Carly and the board. 8 Bitching about decisions made by Capellas and the board.7 Bitching about decisions made by GQ Bob and the board.. : Bitching about decisions made by Ken Olsen and the board..   In 2005.   Give it a freakin' rest.  D This makes you sound as crazy as jf does when he goes off another of? his rants based on his "Rain Man" like fixation with Stallard's  initial post-merger statement.  D It's small wonder that most of the technical traffic has disappeared5 from c.o.v/Info-VAX and gone to openvms.org and ITRC.    WWWebb =20  --=20 C NOTE: This email address is only used for noncommerical VMS-related  correspondence. C All unsolicited commercial email will be deemed to be a request for 8 services pursuant to the terms and conditions located at# http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/e/webbww/    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 23:30:35 -0400 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>H Subject: Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2= Message-ID: <O6WdnXGF6uN8dJbeRVn-3Q@metrocastcablevision.com>    William Webb wrote: 7 > On 8/23/05, Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:  > $ >>susan_skonetski@hotmail.com wrote: >> >>>Dear Newsgroup, >>> J >>>This week there has been a lot of FUD around about HP and Intel and the, >>>commitment to the Itanium 2 architecture. >>J >>That is of course at least technically correct, in the sense that 'fear,4 >>uncertainty, and doubt' have indeed been involved. >>I >>What would be incorrect would be to assert that there was no legitimate K >>reason for having raised such doubts, so I hope you're not implying that.  >> >>H >>>Here is two web sites you might find useful. Please keep in mind that2 >>>these are not specific to any one organization. >>> % >>> http://www.hp.com/go/therealstory > >>>This site contains "The Real Story about Integrity Servers" >>> > >>>http://www.hp.com/products1/itanium/testimonials/index.htmlG >>>This site contains customer quotes, case studies and press releases.  >>> E >>>I thought this might be more useful to you than gossip, rumors and  >>>conjecture. >>H >>Well, that's a difficult call:  are clear statements of direction fromE >>an organization with a history of flagrant mendacity more, or less, . >>useful than (possibly informed) speculation? >>+ >>Both probably have their uses, I suspect.  >>< >>   We did receive yet another internal communication today >>@ >>>restating our commitment to this platform.  I know its not asJ >>>interesting nor does it generate as much conversation however it is the >>>reality.  >>H >>Ah, yes - reality, or at least current reality, or if not even that at >>least *public* reality.  >>H >>Public reality, you'll recall, was embodied in Compaq's "Commitment toF >>Alpha" letter - right up until that public reality was turned on itsF >>head in a single day (though interestingly enough nobody bothered to/ >>remove the letter for another month or more).  >>H >>Since you've seen fit to refer to these current 'commitments', it only= >>seems appropriate to revisit those of the past - see below.  >> >>- bill >> >  > <snip> >  > Aren't you people ashamed?  H Well, cHumPaq (and arguably a lot of the 'people' there) certainly have H a great deal to be ashamed of, but from your continuation below it does ) not appear that you're referring to them.   G So if you're referring to me, the answer is an emphatic "No."  The day  E I'll be ashamed of confronting the credibility of statements from an  @ organization with (as I already observed) a history of flagrant E mendacity is the day I'll become a Republican (since respect for the  E truth when it may conflict with the party line does not seem to be a  I priority for them, at least by the evidence offered up by their national   leadership).   >  > Let me say this:  I Not that I have much choice - though censorship has never been something  
 I approve of.    > R > Of course, Sue Skonetski is going to speak the HP line, because *that's her job*  E Possibly, though it's not clear that regurgitating it *here* is 'her  F job', nor that she would intentionally trot out a party line that she  herself knew to be false.   B So my intent was more to remind her of the limitations of her own D knowledge (and thus the limitations of her ability to shed any real ( light on this issue) than anything else.   > Q > That having been said, all who have read here for any length of time know that:  > - > Sue Skonetski does not spout lies or BS..     E You really need to add the word 'knowingly' to the above sentence to  ! make it at all tenable, you know.    > D > And I personally take offense that you, Bill would fling such dung > back in her direction.  F I'm afraid that will have to be your own problem:  I don't agree with B that characterization, and couldn't care less whether you find it  objectionable.   > C > She doesn't deserve getting flamed for actions of others that are  > beyond her control.   G But she does deserve being called to account for her *own* statements,  F especially to the degree that she appears to be trying to add her own F credibility to the statements of others which she is very unlikely to F have any personal ability to corroborate (save to the degree that she ( simply believes what she has been told).   ...   L > At some point, you've got to let the past be the past and live in the now.  G And that point will be reached when none of the people associated with  D the lies and treachery of the past (including their continuation up A through at the very least the date when EV79 was axed) remain in  A positions of authority at HP (or at least any still present have  G publicly recanted and apologized), and their replacements have made at  H least some substantial attempts to correct the situation they inherited.  D Until that time, HP's integrity (a particularly ironic name to have G given their product, under the circumstances) will remain suspect, and  I HP will remain legitimately subject to criticism for its failure to make  E any attempt to rectify mistakes that are hardly of merely historical  F interest - since their consequences are still very much in play today.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 23:38:07 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> H Subject: Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2, Message-ID: <430BEB93.4594C823@teksavvy.com>   William Webb wrote: R > Of course, Sue Skonetski is going to speak the HP line, because *that's her job*  C > She doesn't deserve getting flamed for actions of others that are  > beyond her control.     G Agreed. However, she needs to have enough thick skin to know that stuff E isn't directed at her, but at HP. We know that her hands are tied. We H know that HP doesn't give VMS management much in terms of marketing etc.  S (Whether VMS management is fighting or not for such marketing is another question).     F Sue's presence here is appreciated. But communications work both ways.D It is far more important that she relay to HP management the FUD sheD hears here. In the end, HP has to know about image problems and dealM with them. Sue also has to repeat the HP corporate line to us, it is her job.   F Remember that HP brought a lot of distrust onto itself. Keeping silentF about the fate of VMS during the emrger while giving details about allG other product lines was bad. Then came the stallard memo, continued use G of derogatory terms such as "plan of record" associated with the murder  of Alpha etc etc.   F HP should know that its actions with regards to VMS customers have notF built any trust, nor has HP shown any ownership of VMS and willingnessE to market it and stop making the same errors made by prevoius owners, * errors which brought down previous owners.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 13:50:38 +0930 % From: Jeremy Begg <nospam@vsm.com.au> H Subject: Re: HP's commitment to Integrity Servers based on the Itanium 2) Message-ID: <430BF596.9000308@vsm.com.au>    William Webb wrote:    > <snip> >  > Aren't you people ashamed? >  > Let me say this: > R > Of course, Sue Skonetski is going to speak the HP line, because *that's her job* > Q > That having been said, all who have read here for any length of time know that:  > - > Sue Skonetski does not spout lies or BS..    > D > And I personally take offense that you, Bill would fling such dung > back in her direction. > C > She doesn't deserve getting flamed for actions of others that are  > beyond her control.  > < > I refer you all back to what I said in the 2 cents thread. >   I > All this traffic began because of unsubstantiated and unsourced rumors!  > E > I've got a special on heavy duty tinfoil, folks, in the wide rolls.  > L > At some point, you've got to let the past be the past and live in the now. > F > That was an action taken by a company that ceased to be post-merger. > D > Would you beat up IBM for a decision made back in the 1930s by the > Tabulating Machine
 > Company? >  > That's what you're doing.  > 7 > Bitching about decisions made by Carly and the board. : > Bitching about decisions made by Capellas and the board.9 > Bitching about decisions made by GQ Bob and the board.. < > Bitching about decisions made by Ken Olsen and the board.. > 
 > In 2005. >  > Give it a freakin' rest. > F > This makes you sound as crazy as jf does when he goes off another ofA > his rants based on his "Rain Man" like fixation with Stallard's   > initial post-merger statement. > F > It's small wonder that most of the technical traffic has disappeared7 > from c.o.v/Info-VAX and gone to openvms.org and ITRC.  >  > WWWebb >      I couldn't agree more.  E Yes, VAX was nice.  But while DEC was still agonising over Prism they D were losing sales to Sun because Sun's processors were faster and/or cheaper.  C Yes, Alpha was a great processor.  Still is.  And maybe with enough B R&D it would stay ahead of Itanium & Power and who knows what elseB for another 10 years.  And we as customers would be paying heavily
 for that R&D.   E Like my customers, I spend my own money on VMS and it generates money E for me.  I purchased my first VAX (new) in 1989.  Eight years later I D purchased my first Alpha for about the same price as that first VAX,E at somewhat better performance.  Since then I've accumulated a number @ of other VAX and Alpha systems, but only one VAX remains in use.  G A couple of years ago I purchased a 900Mhz Itanium and it's the fastest D and cheapest machine here (about 1/3 the cost of the VAX and Alpha).  H I'll be replacing one of my production Alphaservers by an Itanium serverF as soon as PMDF is released for Itanium.  The hardware is cheaper, theH software (FOE) is cheaper, and the performance is at least as good.  The+ systems are also easier to manage remotely.   H Customers who rely on VMS take heed of where HP is taking it, they don't8 take heed of rumours in scandalsheets like the Inquirer.   Regards,  
 	Jeremy Begg    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 01:04:54 GMT ( From: Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net>* Subject: Intel CEO has no time for Itanium; Message-ID: <WIPOe.34049$Il.2149@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>   7 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/08/23/amd_intel_dual/   & Is well worth a read. Here's a sample:   " E (Intel's CEO) Paul Otellini's reticence to answer tough questions or  F have Intel face up to a head-on challenge looked even worse after his 3 odd treatment of a French reporter at the IDF show.   H When asked why Intel was so far behind AMD with a dual-core server chip B and "what's wrong with Itanium" by an accented reporter, Otellini F responded, "You're obviously from France." The cheap shot triggered a 8 wave of laughter from Intel's staff and other reporters.  B Once the laughter died down, Otellini responded to the reporter's @ question by saying Intel took a leadership position with mobile G processors in 2003. Hardly an answer to a question about Intel's close  ; to a year lag behind AMD with a dual-core server processor.   H And as to why Itanic wasn't mentioned during Otellini's morning keynote?  G "In terms of Itanium, it was time budget," Otellini said. "I was given  " 59 minutes, and I hit 59 minutes."  G Multi-billion dollar investments in next-generation chip architectures  & just don't buy the plugs they used to. "    --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:55:54 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> * Subject: Intel redeploys Itanium engineers( Message-ID: <opsvzl7gaazgicya@hyrrokkin>  H The recent thread about dumping Itanium was largely based on rumours and- opinions; however, this is a bit more serious     D http://www.eet.com/news/design/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=169500450   EE Times: Design News % Intel plays catch-up in server market    	  Mark LaPedus	 	  EE Times (08/22/2005 8:16 PM EDT) 	   	 L SAN JOSE, Calif. — Attempting to play catch-up with rival Advanced Micro  I Devices Inc. (AMD) on the server front, Intel Corp. is accelerating the   F development of several new microprocessor lines. This includes a new  I 64-bit Xeon platform that incorporates an integrated memory controller,   8 according to a report from Pacific Crest Securities Inc.  H Michael McConnell, an analyst with Pacific Crest (Portland), said that  I Intel has moved about 200 engineers from its Itanium processor lines to   K the Xeon in an effort to accelerate the development of a 64-bit chip with   L an integrated controller. This product is due out in the second quarter of   2007, McConnell said.   J In the interim, Intel apparently has a multi-pronged strategy to enhance  A the Xeon, a 32/64-bit processor for servers, he said in a report.   I In contrast to Intel, AMD integrated a memory controller within its own   K 64-bit Opteron processor line — a product that has gathered momentum in   M the marketplace. In the second quarter of this year, Intel’s server-based   K processor sales fell 6 percent, compared to an 89 percent sequential jump   $ for AMD, according to Pacific Crest.  N “We believe our findings further validate AMD’s Opteron architecture and  L its advantages over Intel’s single-bus, discrete memory controller Xeon,  L and places Intel again in the rare position of playing catch-up to AMD,”   he said in the report.  K Until Intel announces a Xeon processor with an integrated controller, the   F company is expected to roll out several other products in the interim.  K At the Intel Developer Forum (IDF) in San Francisco this week, Intel will   J announce its "next-generation architecture." Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest  H are the code names for Intel's next generation of so-called multi-core  0 processors slated for introduction in late 2006.  K These desktop- and notebook-based processors are based on the company’s   K Pentium-M architecture for “improved power efficiency,” McConnell said.   J It has also accelerated the development of its dual-core processor line.  G Originally due in 2006, Intel recently said it plans to introduce the   L dual-core Xeon MP, codenamed “Paxville,” in 2005, aiming it at servers  1 with four or more processors inside the computer.   H For dual processor servers, Intel plans to ship a dual-core Intel Xeon  O processor, codenamed “Paxville DP” in 2005. Paxville DP is to be followed   J by a broader family of dual-core Intel Xeon processor-based platforms in  T the first quarter of 2006, codenamed “Bensley” for servers and “Glidewell”  H for workstations, Intel said. Both products are based on 65-nm process   technology.    ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:12:45 -0500 (CDT) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)7 Subject: MMS V3.5 v. ODS5: Unexpected case-sensitivity? 2 Message-ID: <05082321124523_20A0026A@antinode.org>  H    Ok.  I tried this at ITRC, with disappointing results, so here's yourE big chance to look clever between tirades about the future of Itanium  and other such noise.   #    The situation: VMS Alpha V7.3-2,    ALPX $ mms /idG %MMS-I-IDENT, MMS V3.5  2003 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.    ALPX $ dire   # Directory ALPX$DKA100:[UTILITY.mms]    descrip.mms;3 test.c;1   Total of 2 files.       I didn't expect this:   ALPX $ mms /ext L %MMS-F-GWKNOPRN, There are no known sources for the current target TEST.MMSD   ALPX $ rename test.c test.C    ALPX $ mms /ext   B CC /NOLIST /NOOBJECT test.C /MMS_DEPENDENCIES = (FILE = TEST.MMSD) Done.    ALPX $ type descrip.mms    SUFFIXES_BEFORE .c .mmsd  
 MOD = test TARG = test.mmsd( DEP = $(FOREACH NAME, $(MOD), $(NAME).c)   c.mmsd :( 	$(CC) /NOLIST /NOOBJECT $(MMS$SOURCE) -, 	 /MMS_DEPENDENCIES = (FILE = $(MMS$TARGET))   TARGET : $(TARG) 	@ write sys$output "   Done."     ALPX $ type test.c	 main() {}     E    If there's an update or work-around for the failure, please let me  know.   E    I don't mean to sound grumpy, but if your suggestion is related to G SET PROCESS /CASE_LOOKUP or /PARSE_STYLE, do us all a favor and test it @ first on these data before making the suggestion.  Also, if yourH suggestion has anything to do with MMK, tell me where to get the versionD which handles the MMS /EXTENDED_SYNTAX predefined functions (such asF FOREACH).  I realize that the FOREACH here isn't really doing anythingE in this reduced test case, but it is needed in the real job.  (Sadly, G the ITRC rating system does not allow the assignment of negative points F to people who propose defective solutions without having tried them on' the test case in the original posting.)   G    History:  Now that there's a Zip which can preserve the case of ODS5 G file names, I thought that it would be clever to make a Wget 1.10.1 kit F on an ODS5 file system, so that it would be easier to use on a non-VMSF system (where file-name case matters, and multiple dots in a file name are common).  E    Imagine my surprise (and disappointment) when I discovered that it > all seemed to work delightfully, except that I could no longer" auto-generate the dependency file.  G    I assume that this is a hopeless defect, and that the fix will be in G the next MMS release (at best), but if anyone has a clever work-around, B I'd be pleased to hear it.  (Or, if I'm a moron, and did something< stupid, I'd happily settle for having that explained to me.)  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:55:03 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 1 Subject: Re: Next project, C programming problem. , Message-ID: <430B62F5.EF105043@teksavvy.com>   Bob Koehler wrote:I >    Generally systems use file extensions to base assumptions on.  .txt, G >    .c, .cpp, ... tend to be assumed text; .exe, .o, .com, ... tend to E >    be assumed binary.  .com can be a pain if you're downloading DCL + >    with IE, but it can be told to behave.   D Actually, isn't SAMBA an implementation of Microsoft proprietary SMBG protocol ? If so, there might not be any provision for handling of text  files.    E If it is meant as a simple file server (while windows server is) then H the file server never needs to actually access the files, it just servesG them and as such, there is no need to convert the files to the server's G native format since only windows users would be accessing those files.  8 Think DECNET, it doesn't do any data conversions either.  H The SAMBA implementation on non widnows platforms should have added text! file support at the server level.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:13:00 -0400 $ From: "Hein" <hein.nomail@hp.nomail>1 Subject: Re: Next project, C programming problem. , Message-ID: <430b672c$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>  0 "Hein" <hein.nomail@hp.nomail> wrote in message & news:430b3bed$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com... > A > "James T. Sprinkle" <oicmrsnakes@hotmail.com> wrote in message  + > news:RtGOe.2$xq1.195@news-west.eli.net...  >> If Perl is an option... >> Unix-to-VMS: D >> type filename | perl -e '{while(<STDIN>){s/\n/\r\n/g;print;}}' >  >> newfilename > L > Hmmm, very unixy to invoke a redundant image (TYPE) and fifo stack (|) to & > do what the tool can do itself: (<)! > @ > perl -pe '{while(<>){s/\n/\r\n/g}}'  < filename  > newfilename  > Sorry to reply to myself, but that reply slipped out too soon.5 The simplyfied, equivalent perl command is of course;   / perl -pe 's/\n/\r\n/g'  filename  > newfilename   M The -p option is an implied loop through sys$input into default variable $_,  6 printing that default variable at the end of the loop.K The s/x/y/ substutitutes regulare expression x with expression y operating   on that default variable $_    fwiw,  Hein.    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 20:13:55 GMT 3 From: "James T. Sprinkle" <oicmrsnakes@hotmail.com> 1 Subject: Re: Next project, C programming problem. / Message-ID: <7sLOe.4$xq1.122@news-west.eli.net>   / "Hein" <hein.nomail@hp.nomail> wrote in message & news:430b672c$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com... > 1 > "Hein" <hein.nomail@hp.nomail> wrote in message ( > news:430b3bed$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com... > > B > > "James T. Sprinkle" <oicmrsnakes@hotmail.com> wrote in message- > > news:RtGOe.2$xq1.195@news-west.eli.net...  > >> If Perl is an option... > >> Unix-to-VMS: E > >> type filename | perl -e '{while(<STDIN>){s/\n/\r\n/g;print;}}' >  > >> newfilename > > J > > Hmmm, very unixy to invoke a redundant image (TYPE) and fifo stack (|) to( > > do what the tool can do itself: (<)! > > B > > perl -pe '{while(<>){s/\n/\r\n/g}}'  < filename  > newfilename > @ > Sorry to reply to myself, but that reply slipped out too soon.7 > The simplyfied, equivalent perl command is of course;  > 1 > perl -pe 's/\n/\r\n/g'  filename  > newfilename   + Can you name that tune in fewer notes?  : )    JaYmZ    > J > The -p option is an implied loop through sys$input into default variable $_, 8 > printing that default variable at the end of the loop.L > The s/x/y/ substutitutes regulare expression x with expression y operating > on that default variable $_  >  > fwiw,  > Hein.  >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:57:40 +0200 6 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> Subject: Re: RAM< Message-ID: <430b7fb4$0$23217$edfadb0f@dread16.news.tele.dk>   Reinhard Eigner wrote:9 > "Arne Vajhj" <arne@vajhoej.dk> schrieb im Newsbeitrag  8 > news:430a0b78$0$85749$edfadb0f@dread16.news.tele.dk.... >>Will 486/Pentium SIMM's work in an AS1000A ?E > Well, if you have fast page memory (FPM) SIMMs with parity (36bit).    That does not mean much to me.  . Somehow I get the impression that such modules	 are rare.   + Are there any other AlphaServer models with  those ?     AS2100/AS2100A ? AS4000/AS4100 ?   Arne   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 16:00:48 -0700( From: "Chris Allen" <ca.allen@gmail.com>* Subject: Re: Simh. How to triple the speedC Message-ID: <1124838048.111501.269440@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>    Alan Greig wrote: ! > Fancy posting any VUPS figures?   = I have simh compiled on a FreeBSD PC with gcc option -O2 (and B networking).  The computer is a P4 1.5GHZ with 754MB RAM and 128MBD allocated to the simulator.  I consistantly get between 6.2 VUPS andC 6.6 VUPS on it with *almost* nothing running in the background.  To E contrast this with a real VAX my VAX 4000-108 gets 32 VUPS.  I tested E this with some DCL scripts I found on comp.os.vms.  I doubt it's that H accurate but I was very surprised to see the simh VAX perform so poorly.   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 23:21:18 +0000 (UTC) % From: Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> * Subject: Re: Simh. How to triple the speed5 Message-ID: <slrndgnbsj.omk.usenet@zappy.catbert.org>   k In article <1124838048.111501.269440@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, Chris Allen <ca.allen@gmail.com> wrote:  > ? > I have simh compiled on a FreeBSD PC with gcc option -O2 (and D > networking).  The computer is a P4 1.5GHZ with 754MB RAM and 128MBF > allocated to the simulator.  I consistantly get between 6.2 VUPS andE > 6.6 VUPS on it with *almost* nothing running in the background.  To G > contrast this with a real VAX my VAX 4000-108 gets 32 VUPS.  I tested G > this with some DCL scripts I found on comp.os.vms.  I doubt it's that J > accurate but I was very surprised to see the simh VAX perform so poorly.  H That's not bad. SIMH emulates the MicroVAX 3900, which has a VUPS rating of 3.8.   G Mr. Quayle, a CHARON reseller, mentioned it was ~95 VUPS on a 'high end D PC' (making me think 3 GHz Xeon or some such) for CHARON, last year.  E Could SIMH do better? Probably. CHARON, I understand, blows it out of G the water, so it may be doing something special 'behind the scenes'. As H CHARON is not open source, don't think anyone will ever know exactly how, it manages to handle its performance aspect.  F I don't see much in way of threading (it's there, but kind of minimal)G with SIMH, and the load average jumps to 1.0 when I run it, so I gather F it's not yielding the CPU even when 'idle' unlike with other emulators? like VMware. That indirectly suggests it's missing out on other   performance optimization tricks.  ? SIMH seems to be designed more to be functional with particular @ attention paid to correctness than to be high performing per se.  E Could you make the DCL scripts available or mention more details such D that I could locate them via a web search? I think I've heard of theJ ones you used but can't remember enough useful details to find them again.  H I'd be happy to try it on SIMH+VMS 7.3 setup running on a P4/3.0 GHz and report back results.   -Dan   ------------------------------   Date: 24 Aug 2005 01:05:37 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)* Subject: Re: Simh. How to triple the speed, Message-ID: <3n1vf1F196f79U1@individual.net>  < In article <q%OOe.34046$Il.13353@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,+ 	Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net> writes:  >  >  > Dan Foster wrote:  >  >>  K >> That's not bad. SIMH emulates the MicroVAX 3900, which has a VUPS rating 
 >> of 3.8. > J >> Mr. Quayle, a CHARON reseller, mentioned it was ~95 VUPS on a 'high endG >> PC' (making me think 3 GHz Xeon or some such) for CHARON, last year.  > E > I've just tried the demo of Charon VAX (I know there may be faster  I > Charon products so take this as indicitive of the demo only as per the  G > agreement I clicked on)and it gets 11 VUPS on my PC. Simh gets me 7.8 G > so there is obviously some scope for speeding up simh. But simh is a  I > free emulator which doesn't have full time staff and commercial funded  I > development. I think simh does rather well. I'd be amazed if anyone is  I > getting 95 VUPS out of Charon VAX unless it's a cluster emulated on an  K > SMP system. And you can do that with simh has well. Simh also emulates a  4 > huge range of proecssors other than VAX of course. >  >>  H >> Could you make the DCL scripts available or mention more details suchG >> that I could locate them via a web search? I think I've heard of the M >> ones you used but can't remember enough useful details to find them again.  >  > Watch as it may wrap.  >  > $! CALCULATE_VUPS: > $! > $ set noon* > $ orig_privs        = f$setprv("ALTPRI")* > $ process_priority  = f$getjpi(0,"PRIB")M > $ cpu_multiplier    = 10                        ! VAX = 10 - Alpha/AXP = 40 M > $ cpu_round_add     =  1                        ! VAX =  1 - Alpha/AXP =  9 ) > $ cpu_round_divide  = cpu_round_add + 1 , > $ init_counter      = cpu_multiplier * 525 > $ init_loop_maximum = 205 , > $ start_cputime     = f$getjpi(0,"CPUTIM") > $ loop_index        = 0  > $ 10$:# > $     loop_index = loop_index + 1 : > $     if loop_index .ne. init_loop_maximum then goto 10$' > $ end_cputime  = f$getjpi(0,"CPUTIM") E > $ init_vups    = ((init_counter / (end_cputime - start_cputime) + - K >                     cpu_round_add) / cpu_round_divide) * cpu_round_divide 7 > $ loop_maximum = (init_vups * init_loop_maximum) / 10 2 > $ base_counter = (init_counter * init_vups) / 10 > $ vups         = 0 > $ times_through_loop = 0 > $ 20$:+ > $    start_cputime = f$getjpi(0,"CPUTIM")  > $    loop_index = 0  > $    30$: & > $        loop_index = loop_index + 18 > $        if loop_index .ne. loop_maximum then goto 30$) > $    end_cputime = f$getjpi(0,"CPUTIM") D > $    new_vups = ((base_counter / (end_cputime - start_cputime) + -J >                    cpu_round_add) / cpu_round_divide) * cpu_round_divide+ > $    if  new_vups .eq. vups then goto 40$  > $    vups = new_vups2 > $    times_through_loop = times_through_loop + 1. > $ if times_through_loop .le. 5 then goto 20$ > $ 40$:$ > $ new_privs = f$setprv(orig_privs)> > $ set message /nofacility/noidentification/noseverity/notext4 > $! ASSIGN/SYSTEM/EXEC  'vups'  MACHINE_VUPS_RATING6 > $ set message /facility/identification/severity/text< > $ write sys$output "Approximate System VUPs Rating :  ", -> >                     vups / 10,".", vups - ((vups / 10) * 10) > $ exit > $  >  > K >> I'd be happy to try it on SIMH+VMS 7.3 setup running on a P4/3.0 GHz and  >> report back results.  >>    . I couldn't resist.  I ran it on the VAX here.   & Approximate System VUPs Rating :  28.0  $ That should keep the students happy.   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 01:13:43 +0000 (UTC) % From: Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> * Subject: Re: Simh. How to triple the speed5 Message-ID: <slrndgnifc.omk.usenet@zappy.catbert.org>    Thanks for VUPS.COM.  
 My system:  A 	3.0 GHz Pentium 4 + 800 MHz FSB + 1 MB L2 cache + Hyperthreading  		("Northwood") 6 	OS: Linux (2.6.12 kernel with SMP enabled for HT use)% 	Load avg of 0.60 before running SIMH ( 	Load avg of 1.00 after starting up SIMH> 	Basic VMS 7.2/VAX installation -- no SSH server running, etc.1 	SIMH 3.4 compiled with gcc -O2, no debug options   1 12.2 VUPS reported for 3 runs and 11.8 for 1 run.   A A little bit more than 3x the original VUPS of the MicroVAX 3900.   G I doubt that running VMS 7.3 would significantly change this, given the G test is CPU-bound rather than I/O-bound, so I didn't bother to do a 7.3 ! installation for this quick test.   E This, of course, assumes that VUPS.COM itself has reasonable ballpark E accuracy. I do not know this for sure. I wonder what the CHARON folks   used to measure the VUPS rating?   -Dan   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 01:26:24 +0000 (UTC) % From: Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> * Subject: Re: Simh. How to triple the speed5 Message-ID: <slrndgnj75.omk.usenet@zappy.catbert.org>   \ In article <slrndgnifc.omk.usenet@zappy.catbert.org>, Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> wrote: >  > My system: > C > 	3.0 GHz Pentium 4 + 800 MHz FSB + 1 MB L2 cache + Hyperthreading  > 		("Northwood")   " Minor correction: 512 KB L2 cache.  
 My apologies.   E (Though I doubt the cache size makes a real difference in this case.)    -Dan   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:39:35 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> * Subject: Re: Simh. How to triple the speed0 Message-ID: <11gnjn7dfdsg2bf@corp.supernews.com>   Alan Greig wrote:  >  >  > Dan Foster wrote:  >  >>K >> That's not bad. SIMH emulates the MicroVAX 3900, which has a VUPS rating 
 >> of 3.8. >  > J >> Mr. Quayle, a CHARON reseller, mentioned it was ~95 VUPS on a 'high endG >> PC' (making me think 3 GHz Xeon or some such) for CHARON, last year.  >  > E > I've just tried the demo of Charon VAX (I know there may be faster  I > Charon products so take this as indicitive of the demo only as per the  G > agreement I clicked on)and it gets 11 VUPS on my PC. Simh gets me 7.8 G > so there is obviously some scope for speeding up simh. But simh is a  I > free emulator which doesn't have full time staff and commercial funded  I > development. I think simh does rather well. I'd be amazed if anyone is  I > getting 95 VUPS out of Charon VAX unless it's a cluster emulated on an  K > SMP system. And you can do that with simh has well. Simh also emulates a  4 > huge range of proecssors other than VAX of course. >  >>H >> Could you make the DCL scripts available or mention more details suchG >> that I could locate them via a web search? I think I've heard of the G >> ones you used but can't remember enough useful details to find them  	 >> again.  >  >  > Watch as it may wrap.  >  > $! CALCULATE_VUPS: > $! > $ set noon* > $ orig_privs        = f$setprv("ALTPRI")* > $ process_priority  = f$getjpi(0,"PRIB")M > $ cpu_multiplier    = 10                        ! VAX = 10 - Alpha/AXP = 40 M > $ cpu_round_add     =  1                        ! VAX =  1 - Alpha/AXP =  9 ) > $ cpu_round_divide  = cpu_round_add + 1 , > $ init_counter      = cpu_multiplier * 525 > $ init_loop_maximum = 205 , > $ start_cputime     = f$getjpi(0,"CPUTIM") > $ loop_index        = 0  > $ 10$:# > $     loop_index = loop_index + 1 : > $     if loop_index .ne. init_loop_maximum then goto 10$' > $ end_cputime  = f$getjpi(0,"CPUTIM") E > $ init_vups    = ((init_counter / (end_cputime - start_cputime) + - J >                    cpu_round_add) / cpu_round_divide) * cpu_round_divide7 > $ loop_maximum = (init_vups * init_loop_maximum) / 10 2 > $ base_counter = (init_counter * init_vups) / 10 > $ vups         = 0 > $ times_through_loop = 0 > $ 20$:+ > $    start_cputime = f$getjpi(0,"CPUTIM")  > $    loop_index = 0  > $    30$: & > $        loop_index = loop_index + 18 > $        if loop_index .ne. loop_maximum then goto 30$) > $    end_cputime = f$getjpi(0,"CPUTIM") D > $    new_vups = ((base_counter / (end_cputime - start_cputime) + -I >                   cpu_round_add) / cpu_round_divide) * cpu_round_divide + > $    if  new_vups .eq. vups then goto 40$  > $    vups = new_vups2 > $    times_through_loop = times_through_loop + 1. > $ if times_through_loop .le. 5 then goto 20$ > $ 40$:$ > $ new_privs = f$setprv(orig_privs)> > $ set message /nofacility/noidentification/noseverity/notext4 > $! ASSIGN/SYSTEM/EXEC  'vups'  MACHINE_VUPS_RATING6 > $ set message /facility/identification/severity/text< > $ write sys$output "Approximate System VUPs Rating :  ", -= >                    vups / 10,".", vups - ((vups / 10) * 10)  > $ exit > $  >  > K >> I'd be happy to try it on SIMH+VMS 7.3 setup running on a P4/3.0 GHz and  >> report back results.  >> >> -Dan  >  >    On a VAXstation 4000 model 90A:   & Approximate System VUPs Rating :  26.2  G I seem to remember that this system was rated at about 32 VUPs, and if  , so, your procedure may need a bit of tuning.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 19:01:10 -0700* From: "Stanley F. Quayle" <stan@stanq.com>* Subject: Re: Simh. How to triple the speedC Message-ID: <1124848870.716917.115110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   * On 23 Aug 2005 at 23:21, Dan Foster wrote:E > Mr. Quayle, a CHARON reseller, mentioned it was ~95 VUPS on a 'high D > end PC' (making me think 3 GHz Xeon or some such) for CHARON, last > year.   E CHARON-VAX is now available in a 6640 version, which requires a 4-way E box.  On a 2+ GHz Operton, it's faster than any VAX ever built (> 200 < VUPs).  And Moore's Law keeps making it faster all the time.  E > CHARON, I understand, blows it out of the water, so it may be doing F > something special 'behind the scenes'. As CHARON is not open source,H > don't think anyone will ever know exactly how it manages to handle its > performance aspect.   G Just ask.  It's called "Accelerated CPU Emulation".  It caches frequent G sequences of instructions and pre-compiles them.  It's available in the  "Plus" versions of the product.   P > the load average jumps to 1.0 when I run it, so I gather it's not yielding the? > CPU even when 'idle' unlike with other emulators like VMware.   C CHARON-VAX comes with a little kernel module to detect the VMS idle  loop and drop the load.   M > That indirectly suggests it's missing out on other performance optimization 	 > tricks.   C The biggest issue is knowing where the idle loop is in an operating D system.  Or even knowing what operating system is in use (we supportG VAXeln and Digital Unix, too).  Since CHARON-VAX is intended for server C applications, most customers don't care that 1 processor is running  100%.   B I expect that you have to lose some performance coming out of that1 "sleep" state.  There's no free lunch, after all.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 23:02:44 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> * Subject: Re: Simh. How to triple the speed, Message-ID: <430BE34B.2E90089F@teksavvy.com>   Alan Greig wrote: H >What does the DCL VUPS calculator say for your MV-II out of curiousity?    & $ write sys$output f$getsyi("HW_NAME") MicroVAX II  $ @calculate_vups % Approximate System VUPs Rating :  0.6    $ set proc/prio=15 $ @calculate_vups % Approximate System VUPs Rating :  0.8     + -------------------------------------------   & $ write sys$output f$getsyi("HW_NAME") VAXstation 3100/SPX  $ @calculate_vups % Approximate System VUPs Rating :  2.8   < Setting priority to 15 on the 3100 didn't make a difference.    F Now, DEC promised my all mighty Microvax II would do 0.9.  We paid bigF money back in 1987. I want that money back along with interest :-) :-) :-) :-)    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Aug 2005 20:27:17 -0700* From: "Stanley F. Quayle" <stan@stanq.com>* Subject: Re: Simh. How to triple the speedB Message-ID: <1124854037.359364.39990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>  J > I'd be amazed if anyone is getting 95 VUPS out of Charon VAX unless it's& > a cluster emulated on an SMP system.  A Not sure what you mean.  If you have an emulated 6630 VAX, it's a = single VAX with 3 processors, not a cluster of 3 VAX systems.    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.471 ************************