1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 28 Feb 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 117       Contents: Re: CDRECORD v. RMS defaults Re: CDRECORD v. RMS defaults Re: CDRECORD v. RMS defaults) Re: Extensive mount verification messages ) Re: Extensive mount verification messages 1 FTSO bug Was: Checking for "file open for write". ( Re: Has the shine come off of Microsoft? Re: IA64 unraveling... Re: IA64 unraveling... MAKE THOUSANDS NO SCAM Re: no device wsa0: ?  help  Re: no device wsa0: ?  help  Re: no device wsa0: ?  help 8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points8 Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points Re: Point Secure Re: Point Secure Re: Point Secure# Reseller Qualifications - revisited  Re: Sayonara Tukwilla   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 27 Feb 2005 19:48:41 +0100C From: vaxinf@chclu.chemie.uni-konstanz.de (Eberhard Heuser-Hofmann) % Subject: Re: CDRECORD v. RMS defaults 2 Message-ID: <42221609$1@merkur.rz.uni-konstanz.de>  K In article <05022614370109_2780027A@antinode.org>, sms@antinode.org (Steven  M. Schweda) writes: D >From: vaxinf@chclu.chemie.uni-konstanz.de (Eberhard Heuser-Hofmann) > I >> I'm interested to get the modification. It`s a pity that the Author of B >> cdrecord, Joerg Schilling, is unwilling to add OS-specific code( >> outside those parts he had defined... > F >   Yeah.  I haven't looked at most of this stuff for a long time, butG >the recent changes are not very intrusive.  It's generally a good idea G >to allow some system-specific things on open(), but here I had to poke D >directly into cdrecord.c instead of a convenient .h file somewhere. > E >   It's possible that mkisofs could be made to write an image file a 2 >little faster, too, but I haven't looked at that.  $ I assume a huge speedup for mkisofs.   > F >   I haven't looked elsewhere lately, either.  How obsolete is 1.8.1? >   E V1.8.1 of cdrecord  is a stone age version. V2.x ist the most recent.   I >   Anyway, to avoid leaving anything out, I just Zipped a clean (?) copy I >of my whole source tree.  There are some change notes in VMS_NOTES.TXT.     thanx  Eberhard   ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:21:17 -0600 (CST) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)% Subject: Re: CDRECORD v. RMS defaults 2 Message-ID: <05022716211763_27800279@antinode.org>  C From: vaxinf@chclu.chemie.uni-konstanz.de (Eberhard Heuser-Hofmann)   G > >   It's possible that mkisofs could be made to write an image file a 4 > >little faster, too, but I haven't looked at that. > & > I assume a huge speedup for mkisofs.  F    On a small test (22MB), just "SET RMS /BLOCK = 127 /EXTEND = 16384"C cut the time from about 50s to about 15s.  Perhaps two buffers with F read-ahead/write-behind would help a bit more.  Clearly, there's a lot+ of potential for improvement in this stuff.   H > >   I haven't looked elsewhere lately, either.  How obsolete is 1.8.1? > G > V1.8.1 of cdrecord  is a stone age version. V2.x ist the most recent.   D    Well, it's all newer than my hardware.  I see that the version ofG CDRECORD supplied by HP is 1.10.  Does anyone know if any work was done , on it, or was it just captured and packaged?  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:33:21 -0600 (CST) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)% Subject: Re: CDRECORD v. RMS defaults 2 Message-ID: <05022716332166_27800279@antinode.org>  ! From: Nigel Barker <nigel@hp.com>   P > I had a problem a few years ago continually burning coasters with an old, slowP > CD writer plus an old, slow RX2x disk. The problem was solved by disabling theR > Extended File Cache with $ SET FILE  /CACHING_ATTRIBUTE = /NOCACHE on the file I > was burning.  E    Swell.  And from inside a program?  Searching decc_include:*.h for H "cach" suggests that the FIB may be where this gets set.  (And I thoughtH that I was safe, having survived FAB, RAB, and two kinds of NAM.)  These1 things in FIBDEF looked suspicious.  What's what?    [...] N #define FIB$C_DEFAULT 0                 /*Use default caching policy        */N #define FIB$C_WRITETHROUGH 1            /*Use writethrough caching          */N #define FIB$C_WRITEBEHIND 2             /*Use writebehind caching           */N #define FIB$C_NOCACHING 3               /*Do not cache file                 */ [...]      __union  {O         unsigned int fib$l_caching_options; /*F64XQP cache control bitvector */          __struct  { R             unsigned fib$v_file_attributes : 4; /*File attributes caching field */N             unsigned fib$v_file_contents : 4; /*File contents caching field */N             unsigned fib$v_flush_on_close : 4; /*Flush file on close field  */N             unsigned fib$v_caching_options_mbz : 20; /*Must be zero         */)             } fib$r_caching_options_bits; (         } fib$r_caching_options_overlay; [...]   G    If I had to bet, I'd pick Fib.fib$v_file_contents = FIB$C_NOCACHING,  but what do I know?   H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Feb 2005 16:33:11 -0800) From: "Sarkunarajah S" <ngroup@gmail.com> 2 Subject: Re: Extensive mount verification messagesB Message-ID: <1109550791.319963.38310@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   Ed, D You may want to look at the following customer advisory, may provide
 some help. URL:c http://wwss1pro.compaq.com/support/reference_library/viewdocument.asp?source=VO021030_CW01.xml&dt=3   C Though the article does not say anything about the problem being in A OpenVMS 7.3-2 (it exist in 7.3-1), you may want to check on this.    thanks...sarkunarajah s    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Feb 2005 20:13:19 -0800$ From: "Ed Wilts" <ewilts@ewilts.org>2 Subject: Re: Extensive mount verification messagesB Message-ID: <1109563999.054089.52720@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   Sarkunarajah S wrote: F > You may want to look at the following customer advisory, may provide > some help. > URL: > c http://wwss1pro.compaq.com/support/reference_library/viewdocument.asp?source=VO021030_CW01.xml&dt=3  > E > Though the article does not say anything about the problem being in C > OpenVMS 7.3-2 (it exist in 7.3-1), you may want to check on this.   E Thanks, but what they're describing in the article is not really what E I'm seeing.  I'm getting a mount verification per minute per host per E volume for every host that's not SAN-connected.  The article suggests D ignoring <10 mount verifications per day.  I'm getting over 1,400 of them (60*24) per day.    Cheers, 	    .../Ed    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 05:05:08 +0800  From: prep@prep.synonet.com : Subject: FTSO bug Was: Checking for "file open for write".0 Message-ID: <87zmxpiuij.fsf_-_@prep.synonet.com>   prep@prep.synonet.com writes:   , > "Hein" <hein.nomail@hp.nomail.com> writes:  G >> Odd, how this 30+ year old problem has not been solved properly huh? N >> VMS had/has 'SPOOL' nee FTSV (1985-ish in Valbonne :-) to deal with most ofK >> these issues, including a 'trigger when done, post processing function'.   F > So run, don't walk to Freeware 7, and pony up to the bar for whoever > put it there ;)   ( First off, it is FTSO for ftp, not FTSV.  F Second is a minor bug... In the startup file edit to use TCPIP$INETACP4 not TCPIP$INET_ACP so it will find tcp and start up.  I FTSV has a bug in the DECWINDOWS interface as well :( Oh, and it does not ; check that SYS$BATCH is active on the node it executes on.     --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:22:59 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>1 Subject: Re: Has the shine come off of Microsoft? + Message-ID: <42228E93.7CAE31BD@comcast.net>    Neil Rieck wrote:  > & > Has the shine come off of Microsoft?F > Whether you agree with this article or not, it is still a good read. > 0 > http://abcnews.go.com/Business/print?id=508399  D I did skim the article, but I thought if Micro$lop ever even had anyE "shine" it was either due to filth or, like my slacks, shiny where it 3 was most worn. ...or like a lady's nose gets shiny.   G I think the OSS "threat" may be approaching, if not "critical" mass, at ; least the point where it's impact is being felt profoundly.   G The day when mfr.'s and ISVs design their product for OSS compatibility F rather than exclusively for WhineBloze may still be some ways off, butE it is perhaps approaching more quickly than M$ finds comfortable. Not F being able to stop that juggernaut, and perhaps reluctant to join it'sC unlrelenting movement into the mainstream, M$ may be approaching an & "interesting" point in its life cycle.   --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/    Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:42:09 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>  Subject: Re: IA64 unraveling... B Message-ID: <1109564995.2ac4ba93b9ebce9055625a2b54cdefdf@teranews>   Kenneth Farmer wrote: 0 > > Posted any more of JF's stories lately.  :-) >  > Ouch!  :)   H I'll probably have to post a legitimate press release on April 1 just to fool him again :-)   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 04:18:51 GMT 6 From: "Kenneth Farmer" <kfarmer@NOSPAM.spyderbyte.com> Subject: Re: IA64 unraveling... > Message-ID: <LYwUd.26308$Yf5.2687706@twister.southeast.rr.com>  5 "Dave Froble" <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote in message  * news:11228sfse6ok8bf@corp.supernews.com... > Kenneth Farmer wrote: ' >> <icerq4a@spray.se> wrote in message  @ >> news:1109448747.860042.267820@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...5 >> Nej, det r det inte. (In english, No, it's not.).  >> >>2 >>>BTW, when was the last time you posted anything >>>useful on comp.os.vms ? >> >> >> >> ROTFLMAO! >> >> >> No offense Dave.  :)  > J > None taken.  I have a thick skin.  Have to have such to put up with the F > last 6 years of BS.  Also have to have a pretty good sense of humor. > . > Posted any more of JF's stories lately.  :-)    	 Ouch!  :)        Ken    OpenVMS.org % _____________________________________  Kenneth R. Farmer <>< & SpyderByte: http://www.SpyderByte.com    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Feb 2005 18:08:49 -0800 From: jakerpeter@yahoo.com Subject: MAKE THOUSANDS NO SCAM B Message-ID: <1109556529.015381.70470@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   MAKE THOUSANDS NO SCAM   From: KEVIN  Date: 24 Feb 2005  Time: 22:48:00 Remote Name: 4.249.141.42    Comments  G HOW TO TURN $6 INTO $6,000!!!!!! READING THIS COULD CHANGE YOUR LIFE! I D found this on a bulletin board and decided to try it. A little whileC back, I was browsing through newsgroups, just like you are now, and ? came across an article similar to this that said you could make D thousands of dollars within weeks with only an initial investment ofE $6.00! So I thought, Yeah right, this must be a scam,but like most of C us, I was curious, so I kept reading. Anyway, it said that you send C $1.00 to each of the 6 names and address stated in the article. You E then place your own name and address in the bottom of the list at #6, F and post the article in at least 200 newsgroups. (There are thousands)F No catch, that was it. So after thinking it over, and talking to a fewF people first, I thought about trying it. I figured: what have I got toA lose except 6 stamps and $6.00, right? Then I invested the measly E $6.00. Well GUESS WHAT!!... within 7 days, I started getting money in C the mail! I was shocked! I figured it would end soon, but the money F just kept coming in. In my first week, I made about $25.00. By the endE of the second week I had made a total of over $1,000.00! In the third A week I had over $10,000.00 and it's still growing. This is now my D fourth week and I have made a total of just over $42,000.00 and it'sD still coming in rapidly. It's certainly worth $6.00, and 6 stamps, IC have spent more than that on the lottery!! Let me tell you how this G works and most importantly, why it works....Also, make sure you print a E copy of this article NOW, so you can get the information off of it as E you need it. I promise you that if you follow the directions exactly, B that you will start making more money than you thought possible by= doing something so easy! Suggestion: Read this entire message F carefully! (Print it out or download it.) Follow the simple directions= and watch the money come in! It's easy. It's legal. And, your F investment is only $6.00 (Plus postage) IMPORTANT: This is not a scam;G it is not indecent; it is not illegal; and it is virtually no risk - it B really works!!!! If all of the following instructions are followedF exactly, you will receive extraordinary dividends. PLEASE NOTE: PleaseF follow these directions PERCISELY, and $50,000 or more can be yours inE 20 to 60 days. This program remains successful because of the honesty A and integrity of the participants. Please continue its success by G carefully adhering to the instructions. You will now become part of the C Mail Order business. In this business your product is not solid and G tangible, it's a service. You are in the business of developing Mailing E Lists. Many large corporations are happy to pay big bucks for quality E lists. However, the money made from the mailing lists is secondary to A the income which is made from people like you and me asking to be D included in that list. Here are the 4 easy steps to success: STEP 1:G Get 6 separate pieces of paper and write the following on each piece of G paper; PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR MAILING LIST. Now get 6 US $1.00 bills and F place ONE inside EACH of the 6 pieces of paper so the bill will not beF seen through the envelope (to prevent thievery). Next, place one paperF in each of the 6 envelopes and seal them. You should now have 6 sealedD envelopes, each with a piece of paper stating the above phrase, yourD name and address, and a $1.00 bill. What you are doing is creating aB service. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY LEGAL! You are requesting a legitimateA service and you are paying for it! Like most of us I was a little F skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So IB checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161) and they> confirmed that it is indeed legal! Mail the 6 envelopes to theE following addresses: Mailing Adresses 1. B. LAMPMAN, 14 RIVERSIDE DR, G RAYMOND, NH 03077 2. J. WOLNER 1940 GILMORE AVE, WINONA, MN 55987 3. E. C DE LEON, 14014 ROESCREST, HOUSTON, TX 77045 4. A. Lopez, 810 Ave.J, G South Houston TX 77587 5. J. BARRETT, 1054 24TH AVE SE, MINNEAPOLIS, MN F 55414 6. K. Bat, 9335 Alcona Street, Lanham, MD 20706 STEP 2: Now takeG the #1 name off the list that you see above, move the other names up (6 D becomes 5, 5 becomes 4, etc...) and add YOUR Name as number 6 on theG list. STEP 3: Change anything you need to, but try to keep this article F as close to original as possible. Now, post your amended article to atD least 200 newsgroups. (I think there are close to 24,000 groups) AllD you need is 200, but remember, the more you post, the more money youE make! This is perfectly legal! If you have any doubts, refer to Title D 18 Sec. 1302 & 1341 of the Postal lottery laws. Keep a copy of theseF steps for yourself and, whenever you need money, you can use it again,G and again. PLEASE REMEMBER that this program remains successful because G of the honesty and integrity of the participants and by their carefully > adhering to the directions. Look at it this way. If you are ofF integrity, the program will continue and the money that so many othersD have received will come your way. NOTE: You may want to retain everyC name and address sent to you, either on a computer or hard copy and @ keep the notes people send you. This VERIFIES that you are trulyG providing a service. (Also, it might be a good idea to wrap the $1 bill D in dark paper to reduce the risk of mail theft.) So, as each post isE downloaded and the directions carefully followed, six members will be F reimbursed for their participation as a List Developer with one dollarE each. Your name will move up the list geometrically so that when your G name reaches the #1 position you will be receiving thousands of dollars D in CASH!!! What an opportunity for only $6.00 ($1.00 for each of theD first six people listed above) Send it now, add your own name to theC list and you're in business! ---DIRECTIONS ----- FOR HOW TO POST TO E NEWSGROUPS------------ Step 1) You do not need to re-type this entire F letter to do your own posting. Simply put your cursor at the beginningG of this letter and drag your cursor to the bottom of this document, and G select 'copy' from the edit menu. This will copy the entire letter into D the computer's memory. Step 2) Open a blank 'notepad' file and placeE your cursor at the top of the blank page. From the 'edit' menu select F 'paste'. This will paste a copy of the letter into notepad so that youF can add your name to the list. Step 3) Save your new notepad file as aA .txt file. If you want to do your postings in different settings, C you'll always have this file to go back to. Step 4) Use Netscape or C Internet explorer and try searching for various newsgroups (on-line F forums, message boards, chat sites, discussions.) Just example you log0 on any search engine like, yahoo.com,google.com,F altavista.com,excite.com then you search with this subject millionaireC message board? or money making message board? or employment message F board? or money making discussions? or money making forum? or businessD message board? etc. You will find thousand & thousand message board.G Click one by one then you will find the option post a new message. Step G 5) Visit these message boards and post this article as a new message by F highlighting the text of this letter and selecting paste from the editE menu. Fill in the Subject, this will be the header that everyone sees B as they scroll through the list of postings in a particular group,? click the post message button. You're done with your first one! D Congratulations...THAT'S IT! All you have to do is jump to differentD newsgroups and post away, after you get the hang of it, it will takeD about 30 seconds for each newsgroup! **REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPSB YOU POST IN, THE MORE MONEY YOU WILL MAKE!! BUT YOU HAVE TO POST AF MINIMUM OF 200** That's it! You will begin receiving money from aroundG the world within days! You may eventually want to rent a P.O.Box due to > the large amount of mail you will receive. If you wish to stayD anonymous, you can invent a name to use, as long as the postman willE deliver it. **JUST MAKE SURE ALL THE ADDRESSES ARE CORRECT.** Now the G WHY part: Out of 200 postings, say I receive only 5 replies (a very low E example). So then I made $5.00 with my name at #6 on the letter. Now, A each of the 5 persons who just sent me $1.00 make the MINIMUM 200 G postings, each with my name at #5 and only 5 persons respond to each of E the original 5, that is another $25.00 for me, now those 25 each make D 200 MINIMUM posts with my name at #4 and only 5 replies each, I willF bring in an additional $125.00! Now, those 125 persons turn around andB post the MINIMUM 200 with my name at #3 and only receive 5 repliesF each, I will make an additional $626.00! OK, now here is the fun part,G each of those 625 persons post a MINIMUM 200 letters with my name at #2 D and they each only receive 5 replies, that just made me $3,125.00!!!C Those 3,125 persons will all deliver this message to 200 newsgroups D with my name at #1 and if still 5 persons per 200 newsgroups react IC will receive $15,625,00! With an original investment of only $6.00! C AMAZING! When your name is no longer on the list, you just take the E latest posting in the newsgroups, and send out another $6.00 to names C on the list, putting your name at number 6 again. And start posting A again. The thing to remember is: do you realize that thousands of D people all over the world are joining the internet and reading theseD articles everyday?, JUST LIKE YOU are now!! So, can you afford $6.00G and see if it really works?? I think so... People have said, "e;what if D the plan is played out and no one sends you the money? So what! WhatC are the chances of that happening when there are tons of new honest G users and new honest people who are joining the internet and newsgroups E everyday and are willing to give it a try? Estimates are at 20,000 to G 50,000 new users, every day, with thousands of those joining the actual G internet. Remember: play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will really work.    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Feb 2005 13:03:42 -0800( From: tbilopavlovic@hotmail.com (Triger)$ Subject: Re: no device wsa0: ?  help= Message-ID: <8858c57d.0502271303.4534b3a6@posting.google.com>   v koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote in message news:<JJRpQO$3YxUA@eisner.encompasserve.org>...@ > In article <8858c57d.0502250539.515b6f99@posting.google.com>,   (Triger) writes: 
 > > Hello; > > E > > System is Alpha ds-10 with open vms 7.2.3 I need to connect on it 
 > > trough@ > > x-windows client on WinWX. When I try to create display "set? > > display/create /transport....etc" i got message "nosuchdev"  > E >    DECwindows is either not installed, not started, or not licesed.   > Can you help me with brief instruction how do I do that please	 Thank you    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 15:53:54 -0800 * From: "Jack Peacock" <peacock@simconv.com>$ Subject: Re: no device wsa0: ?  help2 Message-ID: <V7-dnSYIOJoOwL_fRVn-2g@mpowercom.net>  6 "Triger" <tbilopavlovic@hotmail.com> wrote in message 7 news:8858c57d.0502271303.4534b3a6@posting.google.com... I > koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote in message  1 > news:<JJRpQO$3YxUA@eisner.encompasserve.org>... F >>    DECwindows is either not installed, not started, or not licesed. > @ > Can you help me with brief instruction how do I do that please > + To start, log in and enter:  $ SHOW LICENSE M If you have a license for DECWindows it should show up here.  If it doesn't,  0 you will need a license and media to install it.   Jack Peacock     ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 20:06:12 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> $ Subject: Re: no device wsa0: ?  helpB Message-ID: <1109552040.4206b8e8b8bcccb96af0fb58df2773d9@teranews>  
 Triger wrote: @ > Can you help me with brief instruction how do I do that please > Thank you    do a show logical DECW*   ; If there is a DECW$IGNORE_DECWINDOWS  it means that in your G sys$managert:systartup_VMS.com it is defined and that causes the systen / to not start decwindows compponents at startup.   A If there is no DECW$INGNORE_DECWINDOWS logical, go to the INSTALL H utility and issue the LIST command and check for some DECW images , this> should give you a hint as to wether anything is being started.  B You can also look at the sysgen parameter WINDOW_SYSTEM. (HELP SYS WINDOW_SYSTEM from sysgen)  4 WSA0: devices seem to get create in DECW$STARTUP.COM   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 14:41:04 -0500 - From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> A Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points 1 Message-ID: <0N6dnQmgVZDOv7_fRVn-qg@adelphia.com>    JF Mezei wrote:  > prep@prep.synonet.com wrote: > I >>Lead and cadmium mainly. The switch from tinned leads on ICs is the big  >>hit.  I > Wouldn't chip manufacturers perform this chance by default on all their  > commercial chips ?  ; Only the ones that they are planning to sell in the future.   I > I can understand alpha-specific chips that have already been fabbed and , > stockpiled. That is fairly hard to change.   Yes.  F > But for the rest of the machine, woudln't components be more or lessF > industry standard (as opposed to custom made) and thus automatically% > benefit from changes to the leads ?   D Some of the chemicals involved are needed to meet FCC and other RFI F requirements.  Changing those chemicals requires that any system with @ the new parts be recertified for compliance, which is expensive.  F Even routine things like mounting brackets and screws are affected by  these new regulations.  H The x86 and I64 systems will sell enough to cover that requalifications.  I I do not track the PA-RISC issues to know how much those systems will be  E affected, they already share quite a bit with the I64 systems as the  * transition was planned from the beginning.   -John  wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:29:10 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> A Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points B Message-ID: <1109546431.a9cfdbacbfe5c22821ad9cd63621c2a1@teranews>   "John E. Malmberg" wrote: I > The x86 and I64 systems will sell enough to cover that requalifications   G Easy to say. But consider that the lifetime of 8086 and IA64 individual E systems (from production point of view) is short since new models are F still coming out. DS15 systems could last 3-4 years in terms of sales,H so whatever adjustement costs would be spread over a much longer period.  J > I do not track the PA-RISC issues to know how much those systems will beF > affected, they already share quite a bit with the I64 systems as the, > transition was planned from the beginning.  G Ps-Risc is still under development with one more iteration due. Pa-Risc E still outsells IA64. And Alpha still outsells IA64 in the VMS market.   F HP is responding to HP-UX customer demand by extending the lifetime ofC PA-Risc. But it is going against VMS customer demand by prematurely # stopping Alpha systems sales. Why ?   B It isn't as if it was only Alpha systems that needed environmentalH changes. This would be common to any electronics manufacturer wishing toD export to Europe. It should be just a commonly done change, not some7 technical challenge equal to sending a man to the moon.   C The european regulations are used as an excuse, not a reason. HP is F clearly underestimating customers who see though this excuse. And this% is costing HP some much needed trust.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 19:10:54 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> A Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points 0 Message-ID: <1124nrmm7oiaq79@corp.supernews.com>   Robert Deininger wrote: > > In article <112288g53rmok75@corp.supernews.com>, Dave Froble > <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote: >  >  >>Robert Deininger wrote:  >>M >>>In article <4IadnW7fT-L9O73fRVn-tA@igs.net>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> 	 >>>wrote:  >>>  >>>... >>>  >>>  >>> J >>>>>>The last day for ordering an Alpha system from HP will be 2006-09-30* >>>>>>with last ship day to be 2006-12-31. >>>>> I >>>>>Will HP make a big splash and cast this in stone, or is this a trial I >>>>>balloon ? If VMS sales are growing, this would mean that Alpha sales J >>>>>are growing and there should be no reason to can the product that hasJ >>>>>no more development costs to it. HP/Compaq hadv long and often stated@ >>>>>that they would sell alphas as long as demand warranted it. >>>>P >>>>1) Alpha performance only has one direction to go vs. Itanic at this point -	 >>>>down. G >>>>2) HP will ensure that new Alpha's remain more expensive than IA64.  >>>  >>> C >>>Since Alpha servers are quite a lot more expensive to build than I >>>Integrity, that seems reasonable.  I suppose HP could cut the price of H >>>Alpha systems and sell them at a loss, and undercut IA64 that way.  I@ >>>can't think of a good reason to do so off the top of my head. >>>  >>>... >>H >>You've been singing this song for a while now, with never any details. >  >  > First, I don't sing.  Ever.    Me either.  Posting then.   L > I think it should be fairly obvious that cost details are proprietary, and* > it is no accident that I omit them.  Ok?  F At one time I'd grant this 'obvious' omission, but at some point when 3 things just don't add up, that's no longer a given.   K >>The way I see it, if the development is done, and it's just cranking out  H >>more boxes, it's justifiable to question your claim.  What part(s) is  >>causing the cost to be more? >>; >>Enclosures?  the tooling is in place, and steel is steel.  >  > G > Do you design and buy many enclosures?  Do you have any idea how many L > details can be added or left out in a "simple" enclosure?  The details allK > cost money.  Steel is NOT just steel, and plastic is NOT just plastic.  A E > change in color scheme costs significant design money, for example.   F But once the DS15 boxes are designed and tooled in all their details, H continuing to produce more is just a matter of of materials, power, and F time in, product out.  I may not have built DS15 enclosures, but I do  know a bit about manufacturing.   H I'm not asking for a new design, new color, new anything, just the same $ old thing continuing to be produced.  F Even if the original quote and price was high, offer the manufacturer F the oppurtunity to sell a bit more if he'll just cut the price a bit, I and while I won't say that the mfg will always agree, many times he will  H agree.  It's cheaper to continue a running production line than to take H it down and tool up for a new product.  I've had manufactureres decline F to make a different product because they didn't want the down time of : switching the production to another model, size, and such.  B >>CPUs? Ok, what's the cost of an Alpha CPU, and an itanic, to HP? >  > A > Yeah, like I'm going to post that here.  The difference is BIG.   F Not including R&D.  We all know that Intel is paying for itanic.  But I all the Alpha CPUs are now finished with anything except production.  If  H HP wanted IBM to manufacturer another 100, 1000, or whatever reasonable I number is chosen, I'm talking only about the cost of the additional CPUs.   H I don't expect you to specify numbers.  But I won't believe the cost is G much different.  Alpha is less silicon than itanic, I believe, correct  H me if I'm wrong.  Possibly IBM is getting a premium for the Alpha CPUs. F   Possibly the Intel subsidity is very substantial.  I cannot come up  with any other differentiators.     >>Disks? No possible difference. >  > @ > Disks are the same.  The two styles of front-loading, hot-swapK > storageworks bricks are quite different, and I expect the costs are quite  > different as well.  B I cannot believe we're talking thousands of dollars here, or even F hundreds.  Nor would I consider $10 per drive to be "quite a lot more  expensive".   N >>Motherboard and components?  They're all in production, just keep producing. >  > I > Yup, that's easy.  Just sign the checks to all the suppliers.  Have you K > designed and bought many high-performance circuit boards lately?  This isOG > an area where lots of tradeoffs are possible.  Added costs accumulatea > pretty fast.  H Talking the same DS15 board currently in production.  $100 more for tha . DS15 board isn't "quite a lot more expensive".  > >>Memory?  Another commodity.  And IA64 seems to require more. >  > L > Memory chips are pretty much commodities.  DIMMs and RIMMs often are not. E > If you think sourcing memory components for servers is trivial, youeK > probably haven't thought about it very much.  But memory cost is probably07 > not a big differentiator between alpha and integrity.0  5 Yes, I have had occasion to source memory components.0  8 AlphaStation 200 - 72 pin parity memory.  Possiblly ECC.  . AlphaServer 1200 - standard DIMM, parity, ECC.   ......  G >>Where is your extra cost to continue to pump out DS15s, DS25s, ES45s?s >  > D > Just buy the parts and put them together.  Same as rx1600, rx2600,H > rx4640.  Or your run-off-the-mill PC.  We should expect all of them to > cost the same, right?e  H You're not addressing the questions, you're attempting to redicule them.  D Is this how you treat customers?  No wonder you can't sell anything.  I >>Possibly the big stuff has rather high cost low volume parts.  But the n >>design is over.i >  > I > All the alphaservers and all the integrity servers (and all the PA-RISC4# > servers) are low volume products.  >  > F >>I think it's time for this claim to gain some substance, or go away. >  > L > Take it or leave it; I really don't care.  Your comments seem particularlyK > naive.  I don't think you want information; you want to argue.  I'll taked > your advice and go away.  > My comments are based upon years in this business.  I do want E information.  If you were to post any information, rather than vague oD generalitties and abuse, I'd believe what you post.  When I've been G given information in the past, I've accepted it and moved on.  I don't rH want to argue.  I also don't consider myself a fool, as you seem to do,  and treat me as.  + For a vendor, your attitude is pretty poor.i   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 19:15:05 -0500t' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>nA Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points 0 Message-ID: <1124o3h32kvkn11@corp.supernews.com>   John E. Malmberg wrote:o > JF Mezei wrote:  >  >> prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:  >>K >>> Lead and cadmium mainly. The switch from tinned leads on ICs is the big  >>> hit. >  > J >> Wouldn't chip manufacturers perform this chance by default on all their >> commercial chips ?e >  > = > Only the ones that they are planning to sell in the future.s > J >> I can understand alpha-specific chips that have already been fabbed and- >> stockpiled. That is fairly hard to change.  >  >  > Yes. > G >> But for the rest of the machine, woudln't components be more or lessdG >> industry standard (as opposed to custom made) and thus automatically0& >> benefit from changes to the leads ? >  > F > Some of the chemicals involved are needed to meet FCC and other RFI H > requirements.  Changing those chemicals requires that any system with B > the new parts be recertified for compliance, which is expensive. > H > Even routine things like mounting brackets and screws are affected by  > these new regulations. > J > The x86 and I64 systems will sell enough to cover that requalifications. > K > I do not track the PA-RISC issues to know how much those systems will be sG > affected, they already share quite a bit with the I64 systems as the a, > transition was planned from the beginning. >  > -John  > wb8tyw@qsl.network > Personal Opinion Only  >  >   8 Is this strictly a EU thing, or is the US also affected?  H The EU seems to be a bit extreme in some things, and some of the issues F are not moving ahead, RE: the software patent issue, and Poland among  others vetoing it.   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 19:26:40 -0500-' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>-A Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few pointsS0 Message-ID: <1124op82am0949e@corp.supernews.com>   JF Mezei wrote:5  J > Furthermore, since HP is now headless, I find it quite strange that theyJ > would have chosen now to change the "at least until 2006" to "until septG > 30 2006" for sales of Alphas. You,d think they woudl want to wait for G > the new CEO to com in, you'd think they'd want to wait until OttelinioJ > officially takes the help at Intel in a couple of months before changing0 > that roadmap to a fixed Alpha retirement date. > J > It is just plain stupid to burn the last remaining bridges at this pointJ > in time. They would be much better off postponing announcing such a hard > "last sales" date.  G I'd think it unlikely that such a decision was so recently made.  It's tH more likely that it's an old decision, just not made public before, and H even possibly a floatingdate dependant upon when IA-64 and VMS actually : were released.  Dates such as these don't just spring out.  G YOu mention burning bridges.  That's a Carly thing.  Another reason to  A believe that she had a hand in scheduling the end of Alpha sales.a   Dave   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Feb 2005 16:34:32 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com A Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few pointsXB Message-ID: <1109550872.067891.88350@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>  B Oracle would create a band of very unhappy customers if they triedE to eol rdb, just like if HP tried to do it to vms ... they would havei toD sell it off to a another party ... and sales and support would go onD just like vms does ... otherwise these customers like us would neverA buy an oracle porduct again, or in HPs case, never buy another HP < system or printer again ... IBM would be the beneficiary ...   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Feb 2005 16:40:12 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com-A Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points C Message-ID: <1109551212.899467.264110@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>i  A sounds like PMDF with Sophos virus scan and Precisemail filtering  and yahmail? :)-   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Feb 2005 16:55:33 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.comjA Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points0C Message-ID: <1109552133.094549.205960@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>t  % what about PMDF/Sophos/Precismail? :),   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 20:22:38 -0500e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>xA Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few pointslB Message-ID: <1109553096.7fe5d269aa0751e900b40aba7a06ef33@teranews>   Dave Froble wrote:H > I'd think it unlikely that such a decision was so recently made.  It'sI > more likely that it's an old decision, just not made public before, andeI > even possibly a floatingdate dependant upon when IA-64 and VMS actuallyc< > were released.  Dates such as these don't just spring out.  H Decisions that are not public are decisions which can easily change. TheG day Carly was ousted for mismanaging HP, any such postponable decisions.G should have been postponed until a new CEO is found (and possibly until  both CEO and COO are found).  F The roadmap in January still had "at least until 2006" in most places.D Carly was ousted in January, and they knew they'd kick her out weeks before that.  H > YOu mention burning bridges.  That's a Carly thing.  Another reason toC > believe that she had a hand in scheduling the end of Alpha sales.g    G The problem is that they are taking decisions that hurt the bottom linerE in order to support a political decision to support IA64 at any cost.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:58:17 -0500F' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>wA Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few pointse0 Message-ID: <11251lh40oa5qc0@corp.supernews.com>   John Smith wrote:  > JF Mezei wrote:3 >  >> > <major snip> > E >>The problem is that IA64 is not seen as a viable platform, at leastn >>notnD >>at this point in time. That is why HP-UX customers continue to buyF >>Pa-Risc based systems with HP having (I think) one more iteration of >>theoF >>chip left in the plans. So why stop sales of Alpha now if Pa-Risc is >>still selling ?. >  > K > If HP doesn't sell *some* IA64's, Intel will close the line for sure. The$N > other IA64 system vendors alone don't sell enough chips in systems for IntelL > to justify the effort. For HP, the egg-on-the-face if they backpedalled onM > IA64 now would make them the laughing stock of the industry and permanently1M > poison customer relationship. If on the other hand Intel is the one pulling K > out of IA64, then HP can point a finger at Intel when the customers bitch H > that the 'roadmap' HP 'solemnly promised' to follow suddenly ceases to > exist.  F If Intel were to make such a move, why would they care who HP pointed D at?  You're not talking about direct Intel customers.  They'll have H decided to accept any flack and move on, selling more x86 chips than we = can count.  Don't think there is any concern on Intel's part.n  F As for HP, the buck stops there.  HP's fault, Intel's fault, nobody's F fault, HP still is the loser.  They're apparently in such a situation D because swelled head big ego types decided that they didn't need to 8 listen to anybody, let alone their own technical people.  - Oh, and plenty of users would be losers also.,   I hate being a loser.t   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:09:00 -0600r2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>A Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points'+ Message-ID: <42228B4C.8CF0F9DB@comcast.net>t   Robert Deininger wrote:s" >  Your comments seem particularly	 > naive. ,  / Well, in that case, I'll have to challenge you.$  > > In article <112288g53rmok75@corp.supernews.com>, Dave Froble > <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote: >  > >Robert Deininger wrote:O > >> In article <4IadnW7fT-L9O73fRVn-tA@igs.net>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>- > >> wrote:a > >> > >> ... > >> > >>K > >>>>>The last day for ordering an Alpha system from HP will be 2006-09-30w+ > >>>>>with last ship day to be 2006-12-31.a > >>>>J > >>>>Will HP make a big splash and cast this in stone, or is this a trialJ > >>>>balloon ? If VMS sales are growing, this would mean that Alpha salesK > >>>>are growing and there should be no reason to can the product that haseK > >>>>no more development costs to it. HP/Compaq hadv long and often statedcA > >>>>that they would sell alphas as long as demand warranted it.0 > >>>bQ > >>>1) Alpha performance only has one direction to go vs. Itanic at this point -a
 > >>>down.H > >>>2) HP will ensure that new Alpha's remain more expensive than IA64. > >> > >>E > >> Since Alpha servers are quite a lot more expensive to build thanoK > >> Integrity, that seems reasonable.  I suppose HP could cut the price oftJ > >> Alpha systems and sell them at a loss, and undercut IA64 that way.  IB > >> can't think of a good reason to do so off the top of my head. > >> > >> ... > >eI > >You've been singing this song for a while now, with never any details.r >  > First, I don't sing.  Ever.> > L > I think it should be fairly obvious that cost details are proprietary, and* > it is no accident that I omit them.  Ok?  < Hhmmm... Proprietary costs? Does HP print its own money? ;-)  K > >The way I see it, if the development is done, and it's just cranking out H > >more boxes, it's justifiable to question your claim.  What part(s) is > >causing the cost to be more?a > > < > >Enclosures?  the tooling is in place, and steel is steel. > G > Do you design and buy many enclosures?  Do you have any idea how many_< > details can be added or left out in a "simple" enclosure?   G I should think all of them. Build one basic enclosure, and add elements E to order if, as you say, these are "low volume" products. To me, "lowHA volume" products are one-offs. Guess it depends on the observer'sg perspective.   > The details allNK > cost money.  Steel is NOT just steel, and plastic is NOT just plastic.  A9E > change in color scheme costs significant design money, for example.O  G Really? How many times does paint for steel have to be re-designed? How C 'bout color additives for plastics? I doubt there's much differenceeD beyond the obvious subtlties from one lot to the next. No additional costs there.  C > >CPUs? Ok, what's the cost of an Alpha CPU, and an itanic, to HP?  > A > Yeah, like I'm going to post that here.  The difference is BIG.   D I think he meant the delta from one production run to the next (same+ spec.'s, same quantity per run, same etc.).   ! > >Disks? No possible difference.  > @ > Disks are the same.  The two styles of front-loading, hot-swapK > storageworks bricks are quite different, and I expect the costs are quitei > different as well.  C I didn't think the old-style SBBs (for BA35x shelf) were being madeI anymore.  F As to the Compaq-style disks, should only differ in power dissipation,D capacity, transfer-rate, spindle speed, etc. as technology advances. Nothing unexpected there.   O > >Motherboard and components?  They're all in production, just keep producing.y > @ > Yup, that's easy.  Just sign the checks to all the suppliers.   D hp *IS* making enough off sales to make more product to sell, right?  H (I know I say they act like they flunked out of business school, but theD implication in your statement could send hp's stock to bottom of the' Marianas Trench in pretty short order!)e  
 > Have youC > designed and bought many high-performance circuit boards lately? p  E Again, how many times to these have to be redesigned? What worked forcB one lot should work for the next, bug-for-bug. No additional costs there, either.  	 > This isoG > an area where lots of tradeoffs are possible.  Added costs accumulateu > pretty fast.  G Please elucidate. I don't come up with any "added costs", unless you'reuG talking about products not currently in production (which do not relatec to this discussion).  ? > >Memory?  Another commodity.  And IA64 seems to require more.s > K > Memory chips are pretty much commodities.  DIMMs and RIMMs often are not.iE > If you think sourcing memory components for servers is trivial, youiK > probably haven't thought about it very much.  But memory cost is probablyP7 > not a big differentiator between alpha and integrity.d  G ...and here again, we're talking about kit coming off the line now, nots+ futures. No additional costs there, either.f  H > >Where is your extra cost to continue to pump out DS15s, DS25s, ES45s? > , > Just buy the parts and put them together.   B That's the long and the short of it, when you burn-away the chaff.   > Same as rx1600, rx2600, H > rx4640.  Or your run-off-the-mill PC.  We should expect all of them to > cost the same, right?k  C See the nearest business dictionary for the concept of "competitives> pricing", and remember: we're talking about stuff currently in production - *NOT* futures!i  I > >Possibly the big stuff has rather high cost low volume parts.  But thee > >design is over. > I > All the alphaservers and all the integrity servers (and all the PA-RISCN# > servers) are low volume products.N  B ...and your point is ... ? The costs remain more or less constant, unless you either:   o Stop producing a product# o Put a new product into productionl  = We're not talking about either - we're talking about on-going  operations, business as usual,  G > >I think it's time for this claim to gain some substance, or go away.g > L > Take it or leave it; I really don't care.  Your comments seem particularlyK > naive.  I don't think you want information; you want to argue.  I'll takea > your advice and go away.  D Well, if you must. I'd have preferred to see some substantiation. SoB far, every one of these has failed to show where costs for currentE products change significantly. So, we're still looking for substance.    -- , David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems7 http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:0" http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/    Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:36:13 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>A Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few pointsg+ Message-ID: <422291AD.8681BB75@comcast.net>c   Dave Froble wrote: >  > John Smith wrote:a > > JF Mezei wrote:o > >A > >> > > <major snip> > >mG > >>The problem is that IA64 is not seen as a viable platform, at least! > >>notaF > >>at this point in time. That is why HP-UX customers continue to buyH > >>Pa-Risc based systems with HP having (I think) one more iteration of > >>thecH > >>chip left in the plans. So why stop sales of Alpha now if Pa-Risc is > >>still selling ?t > >n > >aM > > If HP doesn't sell *some* IA64's, Intel will close the line for sure. ThetP > > other IA64 system vendors alone don't sell enough chips in systems for IntelN > > to justify the effort. For HP, the egg-on-the-face if they backpedalled onO > > IA64 now would make them the laughing stock of the industry and permanentlycO > > poison customer relationship. If on the other hand Intel is the one pullingdM > > out of IA64, then HP can point a finger at Intel when the customers bitcheJ > > that the 'roadmap' HP 'solemnly promised' to follow suddenly ceases to
 > > exist. > G > If Intel were to make such a move, why would they care who HP pointedaE > at?  You're not talking about direct Intel customers.  They'll havesI > decided to accept any flack and move on, selling more x86 chips than wee? > can count.  Don't think there is any concern on Intel's part.f > G > As for HP, the buck stops there.  HP's fault, Intel's fault, nobody'snG > fault, HP still is the loser.  They're apparently in such a situation-E > because swelled head big ego types decided that they didn't need tod: > listen to anybody, let alone their own technical people. > / > Oh, and plenty of users would be losers also.a >  > I hate being a loser.t  F Well, as long as we're VMS users, we CAN'T be losers. Even folks stillG running VAXes on V5.5-2 still win every time a new virus, worm, trojan,nE etc. for WhineBloze hits the 'net. While they may be "Left Behind" astF their Alpha-using colleagues are swept up in the "rapture" of V8.2 andE beyond, they still have what they have, and nothing except an expiredr4 license or irreplaceable can take it away from them.  6 It's hp who loses the most ... loses it all, in fact.   % Reputation as business partner? Lost.a   Profits? Lost.   Customer loyalty? Lost.o  1 Opportunities for future sales and profits? Lost.s  C Opportunity to continue to be a player in a lucrative market? Lost.l  G Opportunity to break into new markets by making virtually insignificanth$ changes to the business model? Lost.  ( I could go on, but this makes me sick...   -- g David J Dachtera dba DJE Systemso http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:f" http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/    Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:28:27 -0500v- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>fA Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few pointsuB Message-ID: <1109564155.365a38142e9cca1b572b7c75bacb949f@teranews>  - One more thing about the environmental issue:p  E EV7 came out last year, the Galaxy-class machines to support EV7 camer= out last year. Not a decade ago, not 5 years ago. Last year. T  A These machines were conceived at a time where those environmental*> guidelines were known. If Superdomes are able to support those" standards, then Alphas should too.  G When they cam out with the DS15, they could have ensured that any order G for chips was made for components that didn't have the nasty stuff that ; was to be banned shortly (whatever the "ban" really means).A  H It isn't as if those standard just popped out without warning. If HP hadG time to prepare Pa-Risc, 8086 and IA64 machines for thsoe standards, itn@ had time to do so with Alpha which also got new models recently.    G Please stop finding excuses NOT to do things with Alpha/VMS and insteadsC find ways to make it possible. That is what succesful companies do.t  H If even the VMS folks are resigned to believe the EXCUSES to stop Alpha,E EXCUSES not to market VMS, EXCUSES about Alphas being more expensive,r9 then will any of these supposed problems ever get fixed ?n  E You make it look like it is physically impossible to build a low costrD alpha machine and this pointless to even try.  For a DS10, you don'tH need 2" steel plating and bulltproofness that yoU,d expect from a galaxy class machine.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 04:16:40 GMT 6 From: "Kenneth Farmer" <kfarmer@NOSPAM.spyderbyte.com>A Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few pointso> Message-ID: <IWwUd.26307$Yf5.2687258@twister.southeast.rr.com>  ' <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote in message  = news:1109552133.094549.205960@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...p' > what about PMDF/Sophos/Precismail? :)t     Download it and give it a spin.e     Kend   OpenVMS.orgh% _____________________________________o Kenneth R. Farmer <><e& SpyderByte: http://www.SpyderByte.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 06:02:20 GMTy5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger)hA Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points L Message-ID: <rdeininger-2802050102130001@user-uinj4h0.dialup.mindspring.com>  N In article <42228B4C.8CF0F9DB@comcast.net>, djesysno@spam.earthlink.net wrote:   >Robert Deininger wrote:# >>  Your comments seem particularlyw
 >> naive.  >a0 >Well, in that case, I'll have to challenge you. >n? >> In article <112288g53rmok75@corp.supernews.com>, Dave Froble  >> <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:- >> a >> >Robert Deininger wrote:0P >> >> In article <4IadnW7fT-L9O73fRVn-tA@igs.net>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> >> >> wrote: >> >>.	 >> >> ...4 >> >>@ >> >>.L >> >>>>>The last day for ordering an Alpha system from HP will be 2006-09-30, >> >>>>>with last ship day to be 2006-12-31. >> >>>>.K >> >>>>Will HP make a big splash and cast this in stone, or is this a trial K >> >>>>balloon ? If VMS sales are growing, this would mean that Alpha saleseL >> >>>>are growing and there should be no reason to can the product that has( >> >>>>no more development costs to it.   G I missed this bit of tripe earlier, and I've lost track of the original G author.  But I'll emphasize what I thought was obvious from what HP hasf published recently:   ( 1. VMS sales have been growing modestly.! 2. Tru64 sales have been falling.e4 3. Alphaserver sales have been falling, not growing.    + >> >>>>HP/Compaq hadv long and often statedpB >> >>>>that they would sell alphas as long as demand warranted it. >> >>>J >> >>>1) Alpha performance only has one direction to go vs. Itanic at this point -c >> >>>down.hI >> >>>2) HP will ensure that new Alpha's remain more expensive than IA64.s >> >>O >> >>eF >> >> Since Alpha servers are quite a lot more expensive to build thanL >> >> Integrity, that seems reasonable.  I suppose HP could cut the price ofK >> >> Alpha systems and sell them at a loss, and undercut IA64 that way.  IuC >> >> can't think of a good reason to do so off the top of my head., >> >> 	 >> >> ...  >> >J >> >You've been singing this song for a while now, with never any details. >>   >> First, I don't sing.  Ever. >>  M >> I think it should be fairly obvious that cost details are proprietary, and?+ >> it is no accident that I omit them.  Ok?c >a= >Hhmmm... Proprietary costs? Does HP print its own money? ;-)i >bL >> >The way I see it, if the development is done, and it's just cranking outI >> >more boxes, it's justifiable to question your claim.  What part(s) isa  >> >causing the cost to be more? >> >= >> >Enclosures?  the tooling is in place, and steel is steel.  >> aH >> Do you design and buy many enclosures?  Do you have any idea how many= >> details can be added or left out in a "simple" enclosure? i >eH >I should think all of them. Build one basic enclosure, and add elementsF >to order if, as you say, these are "low volume" products. To me, "lowB >volume" products are one-offs. Guess it depends on the observer's
 >perspective.   D Sorry, I'm not talking about what *could* have been done to design aG cheaper enclosure.  Other folks have brought that into the discussion. mJ I'm talking about the actual design as it exists today.  The enclosure wasJ designed several years ago.  It isn't going to change now.  So the cost isI pretty much fixed.  It won't magically go down over time.  Compaq/HP paid H for the design and the tooling already; that's NOT part of the price theD supplier gets for each piece.  My point is that there is likely veryH little HP can do today to get the current enclosure any cheaper.  A new,E cheaper enclosure could be designed.  But then the rest of the systemaF would have to be re-qualified (cooling, EMI, shake and drop, ... ) andG perhaps modified.  The range of modifications that are feasible withouta/ major redesign are not going to save much cost.   E The story is similar with power supplies, circuit boards, heat sinks, ' fans, and a lot of other mundane stuff.   I Here's the way I started into this thread: "Since Alpha servers are quitew2 a lot more expensive to build than Integrity, ..."  < I'm still somewhat surprised that folks found this statementI controversial.  (I guess that proves that I am naive, since EVERYTHING in. C.O.V. is controversial. :-)   >> The details allL >> cost money.  Steel is NOT just steel, and plastic is NOT just plastic.  AF >> change in color scheme costs significant design money, for example. > H >Really? How many times does paint for steel have to be re-designed? HowD >'bout color additives for plastics? I doubt there's much differenceE >beyond the obvious subtlties from one lot to the next. No additional2
 >costs there.t  H It seems that when you change the color of some plastics, the mechanicalG characteristics change enough to effect the casting process.  I've beenoE told the black LK463 keyboard uses different molds than the off-whitemH predecessor, just because the color change makes the plastic different. G And then the paint that's silk-screened onto the key caps had to change- also.  Just a simple example.w  D I'm not suggesting that the color of the box makes alphaservers moreG expensive than itaniums.  I'm pointing out that "trivial" changes to aneJ existing design (to reduce cost, or for other reasons) may have surprising
 consequences.p  D >> >CPUs? Ok, what's the cost of an Alpha CPU, and an itanic, to HP? >> eB >> Yeah, like I'm going to post that here.  The difference is BIG. > E >I think he meant the delta from one production run to the next (samey, >spec.'s, same quantity per run, same etc.).  J Ah, maybe I misunderstood the question.  Well, for alpha vs. itanium, sameG quantity of CPUs ordered, there's a big difference in price.  There's anF single vendor for each chip, so HP can't take the business elsewhere. E That's the reality today; once Digital got out of the CPU fabricatingoD business, this sort of lock-in for Alpha CPUs was pretty inevitable.  " >> >Disks? No possible difference. >> eA >> Disks are the same.  The two styles of front-loading, hot-swaphL >> storageworks bricks are quite different, and I expect the costs are quite >> different as well.  >aD >I didn't think the old-style SBBs (for BA35x shelf) were being made	 >anymore.u >cG >As to the Compaq-style disks, should only differ in power dissipation, E >capacity, transfer-rate, spindle speed, etc. as technology advances.a >Nothing unexpected there.  D I'm thinking of the Compaq style in Alphaservers vs. the HP style inD Integrity servers.  Both styles of brick hold the same disk drives. E Different design decisions for the bricks led to different costs, and G after the inevitable markup, different prices for customers.  And thosebG design decisions were made a few systems ago.  What we might consider alI bad design now (from a cost standpoint) might have been very reasonable 5l
 years ago.  I If you could take the disk drive bay from (for example) an rx2600 and usetJ it in (for example) a DS15, there would be some money-saving options.  But< of course they aren't interchangable, either mechanically orC electrically.  So this cost-saving improvement would likely require)J changing the chassis, a few circuit boards, and maybe the cooling systems.    P >> >Motherboard and components?  They're all in production, just keep producing. >>  A >> Yup, that's easy.  Just sign the checks to all the suppliers. d >aE >hp *IS* making enough off sales to make more product to sell, right?i  A My point is that the cost of the parts is pretty much fixed.  ThehH collection of parts and labor that go into a DS15 is more expensive thanG the collection that goes into a DS10.  And both are more expensive thantH the collection that goes into an rx2600.  "Just keep producing" is fine,J but it's not a prescription for lowering prices.  If you want to lower theJ costs, you have to change the collection of parts, which means you have to do some redesign.'  I >(I know I say they act like they flunked out of business school, but thenE >implication in your statement could send hp's stock to bottom of then( >Marianas Trench in pretty short order!)  J You completely misunderstood my point.  AFAIK, HP doesn't have any trouble paying its suppliers.l     >> Have youiD >> designed and bought many high-performance circuit boards lately?  >yF >Again, how many times to these have to be redesigned? What worked forC >one lot should work for the next, bug-for-bug. No additional costse >there, either.e  I Sure, costs will be about the same for each lot.  No redesign, no fallingi prices.s    
 >> This isH >> an area where lots of tradeoffs are possible.  Added costs accumulate >> pretty fast.i >tH >Please elucidate. I don't come up with any "added costs", unless you'reH >talking about products not currently in production (which do not relate >to this discussion).'  I I'm talking about the decisions that lead to the existing system designs,hC and the resulting cost to produce the systems.  Within the range ofeI reasonable designs, DS15 engineers tended to make decisions that resultedeE in higher cost, compared to their counterparts working on rx2600, for H example.  That seemed to be the case for multiple generations of systemsJ on both sides.  That's what I mean when I say the HP culture was better at4 designing low-cost servers than the Digital culture.  F If we decide in 2005 that we don't like those design decisions becauseE they lead to high costs, we'd have to go back and redesign.  We can'ta* tweek much cost out of an existing design.  D In another post, Bill suggests HP should have somehow redesigned theJ alphas to take advantage of the lower-cost culture on the Itanium side.  IF guess Bill thinks that would have been a fairly modest effort.  HavingD been through a few system projects (alpha and itanium), I disagree. G Making a DS15-like system based on Integrity server heritage would haves: taken MUCH longer than basing it on Alphaserver heritage.   @ >> >Memory?  Another commodity.  And IA64 seems to require more. >>  L >> Memory chips are pretty much commodities.  DIMMs and RIMMs often are not.F >> If you think sourcing memory components for servers is trivial, youL >> probably haven't thought about it very much.  But memory cost is probably8 >> not a big differentiator between alpha and integrity. >tH >...and here again, we're talking about kit coming off the line now, not, >futures. No additional costs there, either. > I >> >Where is your extra cost to continue to pump out DS15s, DS25s, ES45s?  >> w- >> Just buy the parts and put them together. t >rC >That's the long and the short of it, when you burn-away the chaff.d >i >> Same as rx1600, rx2600,I >> rx4640.  Or your run-off-the-mill PC.  We should expect all of them to  >> cost the same, right? >aD >See the nearest business dictionary for the concept of "competitive? >pricing", and remember: we're talking about stuff currently iny >production - *NOT* futures!  D Right.  I started out responding to the complaints about the currentG prices of the current systems.  I'm not discussing hypothetical designseJ that might have been (but weren't) done in the past, or that might be done in the future.  J >> >Possibly the big stuff has rather high cost low volume parts.  But the >> >design is over.h >> tJ >> All the alphaservers and all the integrity servers (and all the PA-RISC$ >> servers) are low volume products. > C >...and your point is ... ? The costs remain more or less constant,i >unless you either:y >m >o Stop producing a productS$ >o Put a new product into production   Yes. That's exactly my point.x  > >We're not talking about either - we're talking about on-going >operations, business as usual,o >hH >> >I think it's time for this claim to gain some substance, or go away. >> dM >> Take it or leave it; I really don't care.  Your comments seem particularlyuL >> naive.  I don't think you want information; you want to argue.  I'll take >> your advice and go away.a >hE >Well, if you must. I'd have preferred to see some substantiation. So C >far, every one of these has failed to show where costs for currentl  >products change significantly.   H So you agree with me?  Current alphas tend to be expensive, and I expectG them to stay expensive until they go EOL.  Because the price comes fromrG the cost to produce the system, and the cost was pretty much determined.# years ago by the design trade-offs.    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 06:44:28 GMT 5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger)oA Subject: Re: OpenVMS Seminar in Toronto (2005-02-24) a few points L Message-ID: <rdeininger-2802050144220001@user-uinj4h0.dialup.mindspring.com>  E In article <1109564155.365a38142e9cca1b572b7c75bacb949f@teranews>, JF + Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:a  . >One more thing about the environmental issue: > F >EV7 came out last year, the Galaxy-class machines to support EV7 came= >out last year. Not a decade ago, not 5 years ago. Last year.d  C But the design work was started much earlier.  There were prototype2G systems in 2001.  Once you start building protos, wholesale churning ofn; the BOM would be very bad.  It would be like starting over.n  B >These machines were conceived at a time where those environmental >guidelines were known.i  G Conceived?  I don't think so.  The development cycle is fairly long.  I G don't know when the regulations were changing, but the Marvel designerstH did not seem to be planning for this.  It was not a consideration on the table.  ( >If Superdomes are able to support those# >standards, then Alphas should too.h  G There is a great deal of turmoil around the HP-classic products to dealmD with the changing regulations, now.  Some stuff will EOL sooner than originally planned.i  H >When they cam out with the DS15, they could have ensured that any orderH >for chips was made for components that didn't have the nasty stuff that< >was to be banned shortly (whatever the "ban" really means).  H It's not just the chips.  It's virtually everything in the system: sheetF metal, plastics, knobs, fasteners, wire.  Checking an existing BOM forI compliance is a big job.  Many of the suppliers don't know if their stuffr@ complies.  They have to go investigate.  Replacing non-compliantG components requires an engineering team with roughly the same skills asbJ the original design team.  The reality is that the Alpha design teams haveG been mostly dissipated.  They are doing other work, either inside HP or 
 elsewhere.  J This problem was not on the radar when DS15 was designed.  Maybe it should
 have been.  I >It isn't as if those standard just popped out without warning. If HP hadnH >time to prepare Pa-Risc, 8086 and IA64 machines for thsoe standards, itA >had time to do so with Alpha which also got new models recently.e  F Work is ongoing to bring the Integrity servers into compliance.  (TheyH aren't in total compliance today.)  The good news is, there are teams inC place that can do the work.  The bad news is, they have to postponen6 interesting work on future products to deal with this.  H >Please stop finding excuses NOT to do things with Alpha/VMS and insteadD >find ways to make it possible. That is what succesful companies do.  J This being the real world of 2005, the profitable options for AlphaServersE are rather limited.  If you think that is an excuse, well, excuse me.i  I >If even the VMS folks are resigned to believe the EXCUSES to stop Alpha,mF >EXCUSES not to market VMS, EXCUSES about Alphas being more expensive,: >then will any of these supposed problems ever get fixed ?  H The solution to too-expensive AlphaServers running VMS is less-expensiveG Itanium servers running VMS.  I don't know anyone who has any realisticn? ideas to reduce the cost of AlphaServers today.  It's too late.l  F >You make it look like it is physically impossible to build a low cost0 >alpha machine and this pointless to even try.    C No, see my other posts.  I don't think you could build the existingpJ designs much cheaper than the current costs.  Could you redesign for lowerG cost?  Yes, probably.  Would you recover your design investment at this & late date?  That seems doubtful to me.  J Designing much lower cost AlphaServers would have been a wonderful idea 3,H 5, or 10 years ago.  Alas, they didn't seem to be able to accomplish it,D and they did try.  I don't think there's much point today.  Now, theE effort would be better directed at improving the Itanium server line.    >For a DS10, you don'tI >need 2" steel plating and bulltproofness that yoU,d expect from a galaxyn >class machine.H  M That is true, and I think Digital struggled with this concept for many years.-  F It is also true that for a DS10, many VMS folks don't need a DS10.  AnF rx1600 will do just fine.  That reality seems to infuriate some folks.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:35:13 GMT # From: Beach Runner <bob@nospam.com>s Subject: Re: Point Securen; Message-ID: <ROsUd.93728$pc5.19778@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>e    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:d > In article <Z76Ud.123250$JF2.62180@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, Beach Runner <bob@nospam.com> writes: > J >>The VMS Colorado Call Center thinks very highly of this product and can I >>add a lot of value to a customer planning to integrate this into their 0 >>environment. >  > D > It's nice to hear that call center thinks highly of SecurityGuard.E Actually, no one said anything about SecurityGuard. Point Secure and 2H System Detective are complimentary and recommended products by Colorado ) Springs.    HP can even sell the product.t   >    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Feb 2005 17:12:11 -0800$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Point SecurenB Message-ID: <1109553130.975595.67730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   Beach Runner wrote:e" > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:F > > In article <Z76Ud.123250$JF2.62180@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, Beach Runner <bob@nospam.com> writes:n > >hG > >>The VMS Colorado Call Center thinks very highly of this product ando canOD > >>add a lot of value to a customer planning to integrate this into their" > >>environment. > >  > >uF > > It's nice to hear that call center thinks highly of SecurityGuard.  F > Actually, no one said anything about SecurityGuard. Point Secure and@ > System Detective are complimentary and recommended products by Colorado+ > Springs.    HP can even sell the product.     E Then why did you quote Security Guard in your original message (whichp is not included above)?   % Please try to be clear in the future.u   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:29:41 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Point Securet0 Message-ID: <00A40093.879B25FD@SendSpamHere.ORG>  a In article <ROsUd.93728$pc5.19778@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, Beach Runner <bob@nospam.com> writes:i >o >e! >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: e >> In article <Z76Ud.123250$JF2.62180@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>, Beach Runner <bob@nospam.com> writes:i >>  K >>>The VMS Colorado Call Center thinks very highly of this product and can wJ >>>add a lot of value to a customer planning to integrate this into their  >>>environment.o >> A >>  E >> It's nice to hear that call center thinks highly of SecurityGuard.lF >Actually, no one said anything about SecurityGuard. Point Secure and I >System Detective are complimentary and recommended products by Colorado k* >Springs.    HP can even sell the product.   Like they sell VMS?n     --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMt            i5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" t   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 20:43:07 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>, Subject: Reseller Qualifications - revisited+ Message-ID: <4222853B.B7797B2A@comcast.net>    The thought occurs to me...   H WIth high-end I64 kit not due out yet, and Alpha sales winding down in aH major way, does someone think that the lower prices of Integrity and VMSH on it will result in a proliferation as resellers scramble to make their $Megabuck quota?   --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systemss http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:r" http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/-  " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/r   Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 22:09:03 GMT 5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger)o Subject: Re: Sayonara TukwillaL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2702051709010001@user-uinj48n.dialup.mindspring.com>  G In article <cP-dnXYHmbjclL_fRVn-hg@metrocastcablevision.com>, Bill Toddt <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:e   >Robert Deininger wrote: >  >... >TJ >> The current crop of entry-level Integrity servers run the FSB at 200 or 267 MHz. >>F >That's in itself interesting:  how long have Itanics themselves been I >able to support the faster of those two bus rates (in a fully-populated i >4-processor module)?   I AFAIK, never.  267 MHz FSB is only supported in 2-socket configurations. gF All the 4-socket configurations I know of run at 200 MHz.  The fastest rx1620 runs the FSB at 267 MHz.u  J >(By the way, what's an 'entry-level Integrity server', anyway?  Are zx1s , >considered part of the Integrity line now?)  I For VMS, entry-level is rx1600/rx1620, rx2600/rx2620, and rx4640.  zx1 issD the chipset in all of these.  The are all "Integrity Servers" AFAIK.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.117 ************************