0 INFO-VAX	Tue, 18 Jan 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 35      Contents:- A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 1 Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org 8 Re: Connecting VAX VMS (5.2) to PC (Windows 2000 Server) Re: How to get a free iPod? % Re: HP Press release about 18th event % Re: HP Press release about 18th event % Re: HP Press release about 18th event % Re: HP Press release about 18th event % Re: HP Press release about 18th event % Re: HP Press release about 18th event M Re: I am looking for cheap or free vaxstations, decstations, or alphastations  Jan 18 Webcast Re: Jan 18 Webcast Re: Jan 18 Webcast Re: Jan 18 Webcast Re: Jan 18 Webcast- Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement 1 Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement 1 Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement 1 Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement 1 Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement 1 Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement 1 Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement % RE: MemoryChannel VMS Cluster problem & Re: new.com article about OpenVMS v8.2& Re: new.com article about OpenVMS v8.2& Re: new.com article about OpenVMS v8.2 Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Region coded VMS next? RE: Region coded VMS next? Re: Simple EDT or TPU init file  Re: Source Listings Kit  Re: Source Listings Kit  Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.3  Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris. Wall Street Journal article on HP announcementH [OT]: How copyright could be killing culture - lessons for software too?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:48:02 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> 6 Subject: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org, Message-ID: <l9adnWK5psLMhXHcRVn-tQ@igs.net>  9 http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/2467177     9 http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/3176853    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:43:34 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> : Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org( Message-ID: <opskrk6wgszgicya@hyrrokkin>  . On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:48:47 -0500, JF Mezei  % <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:   E > And the big news, is that HP now includes storage revenus with IA64 I > revenus. A good way to hide the true revenus of IA64, preventing people . > from seeing if IA64 revenus are good or bad.  / That allows Jenkins to claim the $1B in revenue    --  C Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:48:47 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> : Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org, Message-ID: <41EC24AC.2298B4A4@teksavvy.com>   John Smith wrote:  > ; > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/2467177   % Two interesting bits in that article:   G New compilers are responsible for a lot of improved performance for the H new systems. Will those new compilers be on VMS 8.2 for IA64 ? Or is VMSH still stuck with Merced era compilers ? (That whose "donate compilers to? Intel" thing has created a hell of a lot of confusion for VMS).   C And the big news, is that HP now includes storage revenus with IA64 G revenus. A good way to hide the true revenus of IA64, preventing people , from seeing if IA64 revenus are good or bad.  ; > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/3176853     @ The interesting news is that HP has released all the informationE already. So the idea that they can't release the information prior to " the webcast is male bovine output.    D Now, it is my understanding that VMS won't yet run on Superdomes. Is that correct  ? @ So far, most of the released material makes mention that you canH simultaneously run multiple OSs on the same IA64 box. Does that refer to4 any multiple CPU IA64 box, or just superdome boxes ?    G What is evident now is that tomorrow's webcast is not focused on VMS. I F suspect that the windows pricing thing may get better billing than the
 VMS stuff.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:12:27 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>: Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org2 Message-ID: <%SVGd.5979$3z4.5821@news.cpqcorp.net>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message& news:41EC24AC.2298B4A4@teksavvy.com... > John Smith wrote:   F > Now, it is my understanding that VMS won't yet run on Superdomes. Is > that correct  ?   6 Won't run?  Or isn't supported yet.  We have shown VMS6 running on a SuperDome as a demonstration.  We will be; on the larger cellular based systems on a timetable to line 9 up with a new generation and our own schedule for all the ) things we need to do for a larger system.   B > So far, most of the released material makes mention that you canJ > simultaneously run multiple OSs on the same IA64 box. Does that refer to6 > any multiple CPU IA64 box, or just superdome boxes ? >   = Cellular, including SuperDome.  That is, 8-32 socket systems.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:54:40 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> : Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org, Message-ID: <41EC3418.C9B65EB6@teksavvy.com>   FredK wrote:8 > Won't run?  Or isn't supported yet.  We have shown VMS, > running on a SuperDome as a demonstration.  , What will Carly be able to claim tomorrow ?   E Considering it has been 4 years since this thing began, from a purely G PR/marketing point of view, one would have expected VMS to be unleashed F with all its features, especially when you consider the bragging aboutF common source pool with Alpha that does have all the features enabled.  C (Again, I say this purely on a PR/marketing point of view, and I am B perfectly aware that behind the scenes, there are technical issuesL involved, but carly and her PR experts don't let such things get in the way)  
 >  We will be = > on the larger cellular based systems on a timetable to line ; > up with a new generation and our own schedule for all the + > things we need to do for a larger system.   < I know that because I have read comp.os.vms and seen DECies'H explanations. But the average Joe manager who will read the PR fluff forF the next 2 days won't know this, unless Carly explicitely explains the% current limits on IA64 are temporary.    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:22:58 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>: Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org2 Message-ID: <6VWGd.5987$vz4.3769@news.cpqcorp.net>  = VMS set the plan, set the schedule, and the strategy for what < we are supporting.  Not Carly.  The first systems needed are= smaller systems, to get things moving and ported.  The GS1280 B is still a formidable system today, so there isn't a critical need for a SuperDome.  A But JF, it really doesn't matter what we do - you would complain.     : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message& news:41EC3418.C9B65EB6@teksavvy.com... > FredK wrote:: > > Won't run?  Or isn't supported yet.  We have shown VMS. > > running on a SuperDome as a demonstration. > - > What will Carly be able to claim tomorrow ?  > G > Considering it has been 4 years since this thing began, from a purely I > PR/marketing point of view, one would have expected VMS to be unleashed H > with all its features, especially when you consider the bragging aboutH > common source pool with Alpha that does have all the features enabled. > E > (Again, I say this purely on a PR/marketing point of view, and I am D > perfectly aware that behind the scenes, there are technical issuesI > involved, but carly and her PR experts don't let such things get in the  way) >  > >  We will be ? > > on the larger cellular based systems on a timetable to line = > > up with a new generation and our own schedule for all the - > > things we need to do for a larger system.  > > > I know that because I have read comp.os.vms and seen DECies'J > explanations. But the average Joe manager who will read the PR fluff forH > the next 2 days won't know this, unless Carly explicitely explains the' > current limits on IA64 are temporary.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:43:07 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> : Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org, Message-ID: <5_udncctJvXuonHcRVn-hA@igs.net>   Fred,   E If you had taken a moment to read JF's comments you'd see that he has < nothing against VMS Engineering in the context of this post.  J What he and a lot of others here vent about is the lack of advertising andK marketing for VMS by HP when it costs nothing to do so...like a sentence or J two taking 18 seconds to say inserted in a carly(tm) speech of 45 minutes.  I Perhaps you know what will be shown and discussed tomorrow in great depth L than most here, so cut JF a little slack. HP's public face for VMS has been,L I'm sure you will agree, far less ebulent than it has been of other productsK in the stable. Perhaps tomorrow will be the start of something different on - that score, but many expect that it will not.      FredK wrote:? > VMS set the plan, set the schedule, and the strategy for what > > we are supporting.  Not Carly.  The first systems needed are? > smaller systems, to get things moving and ported.  The GS1280 D > is still a formidable system today, so there isn't a critical need > for a SuperDome. > C > But JF, it really doesn't matter what we do - you would complain.  >  > < > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message( > news:41EC3418.C9B65EB6@teksavvy.com... >> FredK wrote: : >>> Won't run?  Or isn't supported yet.  We have shown VMS. >>> running on a SuperDome as a demonstration. >>. >> What will Carly be able to claim tomorrow ? >>H >> Considering it has been 4 years since this thing began, from a purely@ >> PR/marketing point of view, one would have expected VMS to beD >> unleashed with all its features, especially when you consider theF >> bragging about common source pool with Alpha that does have all the >> features enabled. >>F >> (Again, I say this purely on a PR/marketing point of view, and I amE >> perfectly aware that behind the scenes, there are technical issues F >> involved, but carly and her PR experts don't let such things get in >> the way)  >> >>>  We will be ? >>> on the larger cellular based systems on a timetable to line = >>> up with a new generation and our own schedule for all the - >>> things we need to do for a larger system.  >>? >> I know that because I have read comp.os.vms and seen DECies' G >> explanations. But the average Joe manager who will read the PR fluff @ >> for the next 2 days won't know this, unless Carly explicitely5 >> explains the current limits on IA64 are temporary.    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:48:44 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>: Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org2 Message-ID: <w9YGd.5990$9A4.4414@news.cpqcorp.net>  ; If you take a moment to read or think about most everything : JF writes, you'll see that there is nothing but hostility.      . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message& news:5_udncctJvXuonHcRVn-hA@igs.net... > Fred,  > G > If you had taken a moment to read JF's comments you'd see that he has > > nothing against VMS Engineering in the context of this post. > L > What he and a lot of others here vent about is the lack of advertising andJ > marketing for VMS by HP when it costs nothing to do so...like a sentence orL > two taking 18 seconds to say inserted in a carly(tm) speech of 45 minutes. > K > Perhaps you know what will be shown and discussed tomorrow in great depth H > than most here, so cut JF a little slack. HP's public face for VMS has been, E > I'm sure you will agree, far less ebulent than it has been of other  productsJ > in the stable. Perhaps tomorrow will be the start of something different on/ > that score, but many expect that it will not.  >  >  > FredK wrote:A > > VMS set the plan, set the schedule, and the strategy for what @ > > we are supporting.  Not Carly.  The first systems needed areA > > smaller systems, to get things moving and ported.  The GS1280 F > > is still a formidable system today, so there isn't a critical need > > for a SuperDome. > > E > > But JF, it really doesn't matter what we do - you would complain.  > >  > > > > > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message* > > news:41EC3418.C9B65EB6@teksavvy.com... > >> FredK wrote: < > >>> Won't run?  Or isn't supported yet.  We have shown VMS0 > >>> running on a SuperDome as a demonstration. > >>0 > >> What will Carly be able to claim tomorrow ? > >>J > >> Considering it has been 4 years since this thing began, from a purelyB > >> PR/marketing point of view, one would have expected VMS to beF > >> unleashed with all its features, especially when you consider theH > >> bragging about common source pool with Alpha that does have all the > >> features enabled. > >>H > >> (Again, I say this purely on a PR/marketing point of view, and I amG > >> perfectly aware that behind the scenes, there are technical issues H > >> involved, but carly and her PR experts don't let such things get in
 > >> the way)  > >> > >>>  We will be A > >>> on the larger cellular based systems on a timetable to line ? > >>> up with a new generation and our own schedule for all the / > >>> things we need to do for a larger system.  > >>A > >> I know that because I have read comp.os.vms and seen DECies' I > >> explanations. But the average Joe manager who will read the PR fluff B > >> for the next 2 days won't know this, unless Carly explicitely7 > >> explains the current limits on IA64 are temporary.  >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:47:26 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> : Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org, Message-ID: <-aadnTqjeLk693HcRVn-vw@igs.net>  J Possibly, but the flip side of that is JF believes in VMS and by extensionK you and your colleagues in ZKO, as amply demonstrated by his loyalty to VMS  over three owners.  G I don't mean to be flippant about this but you make your living writing K system level code. You could get reassigned by HP tomorrow to write printer 4 engine stuff and it would not hurt your credibility.  G JF and many others write application level code which often time relies C heavily on the precise way you and your colleagues have implemented K something. Often times JF and others have gone out on a limb to insist that G VMS remain in their shops for precisely those reasons.  JF's and others E reputations and career prospects with their organizations are heavily L dependent on what the owner of VMS does with the product at a high level and+ how that is perceived by their managements.   L There is a jam from Chambord, France that I happen to like a lot. The jam is no longer sold in my area. Why? 1 - Not because it isn't good - in fact it's great. L - Not because it's the most expensive - there are many others which are more expensive in the market.G - Not because there is a limited supply - because there is enough to go  around.   F It's because it doesn't sell enough - at least according to the formerI distributor, XYZ Co.. Yet in speaking with the distributor of a competing L jam, his comments to me were "The Chambord jam is excellent. XYZ should haveI done what we did with our jams - do store samplings, have small brochures K about the jam available in the stores, making deals with exclusive shops to I include the jams in gift baskets, ..... That's what made our sales of our  jams skyrocket."  + In other words - advertising and marketing.     H Just because it was Digital or Compaq back then doesn't mean that we allH agreed with the strategy either, but we stuck with VMS. Tuesday may tell# part of the story on HP's strategy.   F JF would follow you and everyone else at ZKO to hell and back, but notE necessarily follow the owner du jour of VMS. It isn't the same thing.        FredK wrote:= > If you take a moment to read or think about most everything < > JF writes, you'll see that there is nothing but hostility. >  >  > 0 > "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message( > news:5_udncctJvXuonHcRVn-hA@igs.net... >> Fred, >>H >> If you had taken a moment to read JF's comments you'd see that he has? >> nothing against VMS Engineering in the context of this post.  >>= >> What he and a lot of others here vent about is the lack of F >> advertising and marketing for VMS by HP when it costs nothing to doE >> so...like a sentence or two taking 18 seconds to say inserted in a " >> carly(tm) speech of 45 minutes. >>F >> Perhaps you know what will be shown and discussed tomorrow in greatG >> depth than most here, so cut JF a little slack. HP's public face for F >> VMS has been, I'm sure you will agree, far less ebulent than it hasE >> been of other products in the stable. Perhaps tomorrow will be the F >> start of something different on that score, but many expect that it >> will not. >> >> >> FredK wrote: A >>> VMS set the plan, set the schedule, and the strategy for what @ >>> we are supporting.  Not Carly.  The first systems needed areA >>> smaller systems, to get things moving and ported.  The GS1280 F >>> is still a formidable system today, so there isn't a critical need >>> for a SuperDome. >>> E >>> But JF, it really doesn't matter what we do - you would complain.  >>>  >>> > >>> "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message* >>> news:41EC3418.C9B65EB6@teksavvy.com... >>>> FredK wrote: < >>>>> Won't run?  Or isn't supported yet.  We have shown VMS0 >>>>> running on a SuperDome as a demonstration. >>>>0 >>>> What will Carly be able to claim tomorrow ? >>>>C >>>> Considering it has been 4 years since this thing began, from a F >>>> purely PR/marketing point of view, one would have expected VMS toE >>>> be unleashed with all its features, especially when you consider D >>>> the bragging about common source pool with Alpha that does have >>>> all the features enabled. >>>>H >>>> (Again, I say this purely on a PR/marketing point of view, and I amG >>>> perfectly aware that behind the scenes, there are technical issues H >>>> involved, but carly and her PR experts don't let such things get in
 >>>> the way)  >>>> >>>>>  We will be A >>>>> on the larger cellular based systems on a timetable to line ? >>>>> up with a new generation and our own schedule for all the / >>>>> things we need to do for a larger system.  >>>>A >>>> I know that because I have read comp.os.vms and seen DECies' C >>>> explanations. But the average Joe manager who will read the PR H >>>> fluff for the next 2 days won't know this, unless Carly explicitely7 >>>> explains the current limits on IA64 are temporary.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:58:50 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> : Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org, Message-ID: <GcudnY9rfqTO8HHcRVn-jA@igs.net>   John Smith wrote: ; > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/2467177  >  > ; > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/3176853   K I didn't have an opportunity to read through the IT Jungle story until now. L I really encourage to to read what Bob Blatz had to say about configurations$ and what will be available and when.  I If you need Oracle or Rdb you can keep your checkbook in the drawer for a - while. Ditto for a system with lots of cpu's.   K Interesting that he's not as gung-ho on the performance numbers as Marcello  is.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:40:04 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> : Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org, Message-ID: <41EC9324.8010008@tsoft-inc.com>   FredK wrote:  = > If you take a moment to read or think about most everything < > JF writes, you'll see that there is nothing but hostility.  Q At times JF does state some outrageous things as 'facts'.  It unfortunately cuts  9 into his credibility when he says some reasonable things.   # Hostility to the lack of marketing.   N VMS users have been s**t on now for 6-8 years, or more.  Can you really fault  their state of mind?   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:43:54 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> : Subject: Re: A couple of Itanic stories at www.openvms.org, Message-ID: <41EC940A.4050808@tsoft-inc.com>   John Smith wrote:   L > Possibly, but the flip side of that is JF believes in VMS and by extensionM > you and your colleagues in ZKO, as amply demonstrated by his loyalty to VMS  > over three owners. > I > I don't mean to be flippant about this but you make your living writing M > system level code. You could get reassigned by HP tomorrow to write printer 6 > engine stuff and it would not hurt your credibility. > I > JF and many others write application level code which often time relies E > heavily on the precise way you and your colleagues have implemented M > something. Often times JF and others have gone out on a limb to insist that I > VMS remain in their shops for precisely those reasons.  JF's and others G > reputations and career prospects with their organizations are heavily N > dependent on what the owner of VMS does with the product at a high level and- > how that is perceived by their managements.  >   H > JF would follow you and everyone else at ZKO to hell and back, but notG > necessarily follow the owner du jour of VMS. It isn't the same thing.     Q Between Palmer and Curly we've been to hell, twice.  Our ass's have scorch marks  3 on them.  We're allowed to be a bit afraid of fire.    Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:22:25 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>A Subject: Re: Connecting VAX VMS (5.2) to PC (Windows 2000 Server) + Message-ID: <41EC80F1.402EE114@comcast.net>    mark_doherty@yahoo.co.uk wrote:  >  > Barry Treahy, Jr. wrote: > > Mark Doherty wrote:  > >  > > >Newbie! > > > B > > >We have a VaxCluster of 3 Microvax 3800's that are networked.A > > >I would like to transfer files and run commands from the PC. 8 > > >We have BNC ethernet connections on the VAX and PC. > > > H > > If I remember correctly, Hummingbird has built in terminal emulationB > > capabilities and, most likely, it is connecting to the old VMS	 > version F > > by way of DECnet or LAT.  If you logon onto the system that offersF > > connectivity to the PC, then do a SHOW NETWORK to see if DECnet isH > > running, and type MCR LATCP SHOW SERVICE to see if LAT is running on > the C > > VMS system, and what that systems service name might be...  All  > you'll> > > need to do is configure the second system to offer similar
 > services...  > >  > We do not have LAT running. 6 > SHOW NETWORK shows the node 202.1 is on the network,  8 That's not a valid DECnet address. DECnet addresses are:   area.node_number  C ...where "area" is between 1 and 63 inclusive, and "node_number" is  between 1 and 1023 inclusive.    > it does not say  > anything about DECnet though.   C The fact that you get ANY response showing an address indcates that  DECnet is up and running.   B Note that LAT and DECnet are independent. You can run one, both or  neither depending on your needs.  $ > To configure the other system do I > install Kermit 95 on the pc ? > install C-Kermit on VAX (we already use Kermit 32 over rs232)   
 That'd do it!    --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/    Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 13:38:56 -0800 From: iMatt711@gmail.com$ Subject: Re: How to get a free iPod?C Message-ID: <1105997936.457886.146910@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   ; Please help me out i have gmail invites for those who help.   ' http://www.FreeMiniMacs.com/?r=14046225 ) http://www.freephotoiPods.com/?r=12149082 * http://www.FreeiPodShuffle.com/?r=14061065   drgarza@gmail.com wrote:@ > This article will give you step-by-step instructions on how toF > successfully obtain your free iPod using freeipods.com for as little asD > $1. Many think that this site is a scam or a pyrimid sceam. A scam no, B > a pyrimid yes, a sceam no. You do have to put forth some sort of effortB > to get a free iPod. You must get five friends or relatives to do > exactly the following... >  > 1 > Step 1: Click here to go to the free iPod site. & > http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=12541248< > To participate in this great offer you must live in the US >  > E > Step 2: Use an email address at the bottom of the page and choose a @ > password. (they will send you email, so please use a secondary account) >  > E > Step 3: Fill out all required shipping information. This tells them  > where to send your iPod. >  > G > Step 4: (Do not exit at this point) This is the part that over 90% of F > the people start thinking: "Maybe this isn't for real." They present toC > you 10 different "optional" offers. These are not any of the real 1 > offers needed to complete the getting the iPod.  >  > B > Step 5: Skip all of the previous offers and you get to the referD > friends page. You can start sending emails to your friends here or skip > this step and do it later. >  > C > Step 6: Complete an offer. This is where real companies like AOL,  RealG > Networks and more are advertising through freeIpods.com. This is what B > makes them successfull. Choose an offer and purchase or sign up.E > (Choose the RealNetworks Real Rapsody. This cost $1...yes $1 dollar  for B > 30 days. Cancel anytime. Even if you forget its only $10 a month after D > the first month. For signing up they also give you 5 free songs toB > burn. This is the best offer. Nothing is free, but an iPod for a dollarD > and a little work is worth it. Some offers change. There is always one B > offer where you pay next to nothing or just sign up for a 30 day trial. >  > B > Step 7: Get your friends to do the same thing. Even if you don't- > complete it you get to download five songs.  >  > C > Note: Completing an offer and not signing up your friends is what  theyE > are counting on. It is more likely you get intreagued and then give  up. D > This doesn't mean that it is a scam. All you must do it finish. If thisG > still sounds to good to be true then go pay $300 for a new iPod. Have  > patience and good luck.  >  > 3 > If you haven't started yet. Get your iPod here!!! & > http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=12541248   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:32:36 GMT 1 From: Keith Parris <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> . Subject: Re: HP Press release about 18th event1 Message-ID: <oWXGd.5989$ZA4.549@news.cpqcorp.net>    JF Mezei wrote: 3 >    HP (NYSE:HPQ)(Nasdaq:HPQ) today announced that 2 >    in its fiscal year 2004 the company surpassed( >    $1 billion in sales of HP Integrity2 >    server-related solutions, marking a milestone2 >    in the growing popularity of the servers as a3 >    leading choice for business' most demanding IT  >    workloads.   H This is quite a significant number. And it can only get better with the  VMS announcement tomorrow.  @  > (so much about not being allowed to disclose number prior to  quarterly numbers)  E Note that this data covers fiscal year 2004. What you aren't hearing  E about here is how much has been sold in Q1FY2005. That would be data   covered by the "quiet period".   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:59:01 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> . Subject: Re: HP Press release about 18th event, Message-ID: <SdGdnYsv6LDdzHHcRVn-vw@igs.net>   Keith Parris wrote:  > JF Mezei wrote: 4 >>    HP (NYSE:HPQ)(Nasdaq:HPQ) today announced that3 >>    in its fiscal year 2004 the company surpassed ) >>    $1 billion in sales of HP Integrity 3 >>    server-related solutions, marking a milestone 3 >>    in the growing popularity of the servers as a 4 >>    leading choice for business' most demanding IT >>    workloads. > E > This is quite a significant number. And it can only get better with   > the VMS announcement tomorrow. > A >  > (so much about not being allowed to disclose number prior to  > quarterly numbers) > F > Note that this data covers fiscal year 2004. What you aren't hearingF > about here is how much has been sold in Q1FY2005. That would be data  > covered by the "quiet period".    J "surpassed $1 billion in sales of HP Integrity server-*related* solutions,I marking a milestone in the growing popularity of the servers as a leading 1 choice for business' most demanding IT workloads.   K The solutions -- *including* servers, software, HP StorageWorks systems and  hardware services...."    2 The operative words are *related* and *including*.  I Related and including means everthring else they sold *with* the servers, J not just the servers.  The value of the servers probably accounted for 25%K of the $1B quoted, or about 1,000 boxes tops, as opposed to boxtops - which E can be trading in on servers by sending 10 boxtops and $6.95 to cover  postage and handling to:   carly(tm)'s World-'O-Servers. P.O. Box "I wish Bush called me to Washington" California Dreaming, CA    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:38:05 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> . Subject: Re: HP Press release about 18th event, Message-ID: <41EC5A5E.23F30A39@teksavvy.com>   John Smith wrote: L > "surpassed $1 billion in sales of HP Integrity server-*related* solutions,  G Remember that another article explained this quite well. They lumped in 3 lots of stuff including all storage related sales.    = (A bit like improving the PC business by including printers).    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:58:28 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> . Subject: Re: HP Press release about 18th event( Message-ID: <opskrwzqj9zgicya@hyrrokkin>  . On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:38:05 -0500, JF Mezei  % <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:    > John Smith wrote: D >> "surpassed $1 billion in sales of HP Integrity server-*related*  
 >> solutions,  > I > Remember that another article explained this quite well. They lumped in 4 > lots of stuff including all storage related sales. > ? > (A bit like improving the PC business by including printers).   = I've deleted it, but did it not also include storage systems?    --  C Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:09:38 -0500 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>. Subject: Re: HP Press release about 18th event= Message-ID: <Yq-dnWyiYZFiFnHcRVn-hg@metrocastcablevision.com>    John Smith wrote:V > Keith Parris wrote:u >  >>JF Mezei wrote:  >>4 >>>   HP (NYSE:HPQ)(Nasdaq:HPQ) today announced that3 >>>   in its fiscal year 2004 the company surpassed ) >>>   $1 billion in sales of HP Integritym3 >>>   server-related solutions, marking a milestone.3 >>>   in the growing popularity of the servers as ar4 >>>   leading choice for business' most demanding IT >>>   workloads. >>E >>This is quite a significant number. And it can only get better withp  >>the VMS announcement tomorrow. >>A >> > (so much about not being allowed to disclose number prior ton >>quarterly numbers) >>F >>Note that this data covers fiscal year 2004. What you aren't hearingF >>about here is how much has been sold in Q1FY2005. That would be data  >>covered by the "quiet period". >  >  > L > "surpassed $1 billion in sales of HP Integrity server-*related* solutions,K > marking a milestone in the growing popularity of the servers as a leadinge3 > choice for business' most demanding IT workloads.o > M > The solutions -- *including* servers, software, HP StorageWorks systems andh > hardware services...." >  > 4 > The operative words are *related* and *including*. > K > Related and including means everthring else they sold *with* the servers,pL > not just the servers.  The value of the servers probably accounted for 25%. > of the $1B quoted, or about 1,000 boxes tops  F To be fair, that's about the way Compaq used to phrase Alpha 'system' I sales.  Of course, they managed to rake in more like $7 billion annually rA between VMS and Tru64 - without much marketing, not counting the eI (probably fairly minor) contribution from the AlphaLinux contingent, and e> without the help from the HP-UX customer base that Itanic has.  G But that wasn't enough to make Compaq consider Alpha successful enough n to continue with...    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:48:23 -0500E' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>o. Subject: Re: HP Press release about 18th event, Message-ID: <41EC9517.8050607@tsoft-inc.com>   John Smith wrote:l   > Keith Parris wrote:r >  >>JF Mezei wrote:r >>4 >>>   HP (NYSE:HPQ)(Nasdaq:HPQ) today announced that3 >>>   in its fiscal year 2004 the company surpasseds) >>>   $1 billion in sales of HP Integrity 3 >>>   server-related solutions, marking a milestones3 >>>   in the growing popularity of the servers as ar4 >>>   leading choice for business' most demanding IT >>>   workloads. >>>eE >>This is quite a significant number. And it can only get better withe  >>the VMS announcement tomorrow. >>A >> > (so much about not being allowed to disclose number prior tos >>quarterly numbers) >>F >>Note that this data covers fiscal year 2004. What you aren't hearingF >>about here is how much has been sold in Q1FY2005. That would be data  >>covered by the "quiet period". >> >  > L > "surpassed $1 billion in sales of HP Integrity server-*related* solutions,K > marking a milestone in the growing popularity of the servers as a leadingl3 > choice for business' most demanding IT workloads.- > M > The solutions -- *including* servers, software, HP StorageWorks systems and1 > hardware services...." >  > 4 > The operative words are *related* and *including*. > K > Related and including means everthring else they sold *with* the servers, L > not just the servers.  The value of the servers probably accounted for 25%M > of the $1B quoted, or about 1,000 boxes tops, as opposed to boxtops - which G > can be trading in on servers by sending 10 boxtops and $6.95 to coverc > postage and handling to: >  > carly(tm)'s World-'O-Servers0 > P.O. Box "I wish Bush called me to Washington" > California Dreaming, CA5 >  >  >  >   J My only question is how much of the "software, storage, and services" was  purchased for Alphas?    Dave   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 20:12:12 -08001 From: "Logistic Solutions" <jjt13911@hotmail.com> V Subject: Re: I am looking for cheap or free vaxstations, decstations, or alphastationsC Message-ID: <1106021531.975902.295790@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>-  G My name is Ruben Flores I own a Shipping company in Texas and will giveeF a cheaper price that no one can match.  We can save 50 percent off UPSF and FED-ex prices.  We can ship anywhere in the world at anytime.   IfF you need a quote please feel free to call at 210-364-5333 or e-mail atB jjt13...@hotmail.com. We will need to know the weight, where it is% going and how fast you want it there.a  If interested please contact me.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:32:00 -0800e# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>  Subject: Jan 18 Webcastg( Message-ID: <opskrhvme1zgicya@hyrrokkin>  @ I just signed up for it and there seems to be a problem with the< web page.  I tried with IE6 as well as Opera, and same thing   --  C Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:02:23 -0500t- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>a Subject: Re: Jan 18 Webcasta, Message-ID: <41EC35E7.EB15E7C2@teksavvy.com>  * Soem, additional information available at:  < http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press_kits/2005/integrity/  D Webcast is 1 hour long, with 30 minutes of presentations starting at< 08:30 PT, and the chat with Ann Livermore starting at 09:PT.   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 16:15:51 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)r Subject: Re: Jan 18 Webcastn3 Message-ID: <9Mzw+9rZv0Yx@eisner.encompasserve.org>g  N In article <opskrhvme1zgicya@hyrrokkin>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes:B > I just signed up for it and there seems to be a problem with the> > web page.  I tried with IE6 as well as Opera, and same thing  G I gave up several years ago on anything VMS Marketing terms a "webcast"eF due to such problems.  But I am happy the competent people are testing+ the operating system, which is what counts.s   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:26:24 GMTt6 From: "Kenneth Farmer" <kfarmer@NOSPAM.spyderbyte.com> Subject: Re: Jan 18 Webcaste> Message-ID: <AQXGd.22765$fE4.4358860@twister.southeast.rr.com>  ; "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message r& news:41EC35E7.EB15E7C2@teksavvy.com..., > Soem, additional information available at: >o> > http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press_kits/2005/integrity/ >yF > Webcast is 1 hour long, with 30 minutes of presentations starting at> > 08:30 PT, and the chat with Ann Livermore starting at 09:PT.     Look at the top of that page!k  1 "HP recommends Microsoft Windows XP Professional"e   Argh!        Ken:   OpenVMS.orgr% _____________________________________c Kenneth R. Farmer <><u% SpyderByte: http://www.SpyderByte.comg   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:16:38 -0600?2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> Subject: Re: Jan 18 Webcasts+ Message-ID: <41EC7F96.5160FA0A@comcast.net>t   Kenneth Farmer wrote:  > < > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message( > news:41EC35E7.EB15E7C2@teksavvy.com.... > > Soem, additional information available at: > >c@ > > http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press_kits/2005/integrity/ > >hH > > Webcast is 1 hour long, with 30 minutes of presentations starting at@ > > 08:30 PT, and the chat with Ann Livermore starting at 09:PT. >  > Look at the top of that page!s > 3 > "HP recommends Microsoft Windows XP Professional"c >  > Argh!i  8 ...and you expected - what? Mozilla on VMS + DECwindows?   -- s David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:t" 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: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:59:19 -0500e# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>m6 Subject: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement, Message-ID: <pNudnSvQd5ai3nHcRVn-vA@igs.net>  9 http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/8991740h  ? "Alpha customers will see 300 to 400 to 500 percent performancetI improvements," said Rich Marcello, HP's senior vice president and generaln$ manager of business critcal servers.    K I'll bite..... how's this measured..... a NOP loop? Are we going to have to.I wait a while to benchmark a  2001 vintage Compaq Alpha vs. a 2009 vintage K Itanic?  Or are they just going to send  Two-Fingers Vito around to kneecap6
 the Alpha?   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 19:54:20 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) : Subject: Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement3 Message-ID: <NrOq9BsNQbr6@eisner.encompasserve.org>   R In article <pNudnSvQd5ai3nHcRVn-vA@igs.net>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes:; > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/8991740h > A > "Alpha customers will see 300 to 400 to 500 percent performancetK > improvements," said Rich Marcello, HP's senior vice president and general/& > manager of business critcal servers. >  > M > I'll bite..... how's this measured..... a NOP loop? Are we going to have to K > wait a while to benchmark a  2001 vintage Compaq Alpha vs. a 2009 vintagebM > Itanic?  Or are they just going to send  Two-Fingers Vito around to kneecapt > the Alpha? >   B 	Doesn't really say much does it?  Maybe one of the few benchmarks. 	for apples-to-apples would be SAP, we'll see.  = 	But from what we see in realworldtech , Montecito will be no C 	slouch.  So maybe he is thinking or comparing Montecito to currentn 	EV7.,   				Robl   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:18:48 -0600-2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>: Subject: Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement+ Message-ID: <41EC8018.E0C4C0C1@comcast.net>e   John Smith wrote:  > ; > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/8991740m > A > "Alpha customers will see 300 to 400 to 500 percent performance K > improvements," said Rich Marcello, HP's senior vice president and generalv& > manager of business critcal servers. > M > I'll bite..... how's this measured..... a NOP loop? Are we going to have to K > wait a while to benchmark a  2001 vintage Compaq Alpha vs. a 2009 vintagehM > Itanic?  Or are they just going to send  Two-Fingers Vito around to kneecaps > the Alpha?   No - the Capuzzo Brothers.   -- f David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:a" 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/e   Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:32:41 -0500T- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>y: Subject: Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement, Message-ID: <41EC833E.C7EE1E64@teksavvy.com>   Rob Young wrote:F >         But from what we see in realworldtech , Montecito will be noL >         slouch.  So maybe he is thinking or comparing Montecito to current >         EV7.  D How about comparing production 8.2 with the VMS that first booted onE Merced with all the debugging turned on ? Could that explain the 500%g performance difference ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:18:10 -0500h( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>: Subject: Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement= Message-ID: <6pidnZ009YtiEHHcRVn-gw@metrocastcablevision.com>    Rob Young wrote:T > In article <pNudnSvQd5ai3nHcRVn-vA@igs.net>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes: > ; >>http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/8991740> >>A >>"Alpha customers will see 300 to 400 to 500 percent performance>K >>improvements," said Rich Marcello, HP's senior vice president and general & >>manager of business critcal servers. >> >>M >>I'll bite..... how's this measured..... a NOP loop? Are we going to have totK >>wait a while to benchmark a  2001 vintage Compaq Alpha vs. a 2009 vintage>M >>Itanic?  Or are they just going to send  Two-Fingers Vito around to kneecapt >>the Alpha? >> >  > D > 	Doesn't really say much does it?  Maybe one of the few benchmarks0 > 	for apples-to-apples would be SAP, we'll see. > ? > 	But from what we see in realworldtech , Montecito will be nonE > 	slouch.  So maybe he is thinking or comparing Montecito to currento > 	EV7.g  H Isn't it impressive what the advantage of two full process generations, I 7 years of additional progress in core technology, and several times the nG chip area can do?  At least as long as you don't want to compare large eG systems (but weren't they the niche to which Itanic was supposed to be m retreating these days?).   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 04:38:30 GMTp* From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>: Subject: Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement2 Message-ID: <ap0Hd.5998$UD4.4248@news.cpqcorp.net>  + Would you like some whine with your cheese?r    5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message 7 news:6pidnZ009YtiEHHcRVn-gw@metrocastcablevision.com...e > Rob Young wrote:= > > In article <pNudnSvQd5ai3nHcRVn-vA@igs.net>, "John Smith"n <a@nonymous.com> writes: > >f= > >>http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/8991740s > >>C > >>"Alpha customers will see 300 to 400 to 500 percent performancetE > >>improvements," said Rich Marcello, HP's senior vice president and  generalh( > >>manager of business critcal servers. > >> > >>L > >>I'll bite..... how's this measured..... a NOP loop? Are we going to have toE > >>wait a while to benchmark a  2001 vintage Compaq Alpha vs. a 2009i vintagetG > >>Itanic?  Or are they just going to send  Two-Fingers Vito around to  kneecapt > >>the Alpha? > >> > >  > > E > > Doesn't really say much does it?  Maybe one of the few benchmarkss1 > > for apples-to-apples would be SAP, we'll see.E > >k@ > > But from what we see in realworldtech , Montecito will be noF > > slouch.  So maybe he is thinking or comparing Montecito to current > > EV7. > I > Isn't it impressive what the advantage of two full process generations, J > 7 years of additional progress in core technology, and several times theH > chip area can do?  At least as long as you don't want to compare largeH > systems (but weren't they the niche to which Itanic was supposed to be > retreating these days?). >  > - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:55:24 -0500r( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>: Subject: Re: Marcello predicts 500% perfomance improvement= Message-ID: <k4mdnQmWB6BXOXHcRVn-1g@metrocastcablevision.com>t   FredK wrote:- > Would you like some whine with your cheese?n  G Actually, all the cheese seems to have been monopolized by cHumPaq and  F Itanic.  But no matter how hard they try to convince people that it's G really a greenish moon, the industry just doesn't seem to be buying it.m  C Now that Intel has stated publicly that Itanic's niche is high-end gG servers (since it so obviously can't compete with Opteron or even Xeon  F in the low end), it's worth recalling that when both products were in G 180 nm Itanic (McKinley) couldn't hold a candle to EV7 in the few such  G places where HP allowed EV7 to compete.  For that matter, it took HP a AG year or so even after the 130 nm. Madison was released before it could HI tweak up a 32-processor system which could beat the 32-processor 1280 in MI SAP SD - and then it did so only by a small margin (and against an Alpha yH platform which had not been similarly tweaked).  And in the HPC area is G there even now anything within shouting distance of EV7's large-system g STREAMS performance?  E By any measure save performance on regular (e.g, FP) code Itanic has lE never been impressive:  only its gargantuan on-chip caches (the sole eG element of its architecture worthy of real respect) have allowed it to nI be competitive.  Montecito will have *7 times* as much on-chip cache for tD *each* core as EV7 does:  that, plus the far larger number of logic H transistors trying to eke out what performance they can find, is what I H was referring to in talking rather loosely about 'chip area' - though I B should have referred to transistor count instead, since given its ? 2-process-generation advantage each Montecito core is actually a+ comparable to an EV7 core in absolute size.   B And yet it will *still* be questionable whether a large Montecito H Superdome system will be able to eclipse a large EV7 system, because of 0 the significant difference in scaling linearity.  A Too bad that IBM and, at the low end, AMD managed to take up the lF considerable slack left by the EV8 cancellation:  otherwise, HP might ? have had at least a *chance* of spinning Itanic into something  / superficially resembling a winner.  As it is...o   - bill   >  > 7 > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagec9 > news:6pidnZ009YtiEHHcRVn-gw@metrocastcablevision.com...  >  >>Rob Young wrote: >>< >>>In article <pNudnSvQd5ai3nHcRVn-vA@igs.net>, "John Smith" >  > <a@nonymous.com> writes: > = >>>>http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/01/17/8991740a >>>>C >>>>"Alpha customers will see 300 to 400 to 500 percent performanceaE >>>>improvements," said Rich Marcello, HP's senior vice president and  > 	 > generaly > ( >>>>manager of business critcal servers. >>>> >>>>L >>>>I'll bite..... how's this measured..... a NOP loop? Are we going to have >  > to > E >>>>wait a while to benchmark a  2001 vintage Compaq Alpha vs. a 2009e > 	 > vintageF > G >>>>Itanic?  Or are they just going to send  Two-Fingers Vito around to  > 	 > kneecapo >  >>>>the Alpha? >>>> >>>s >>>nD >>>Doesn't really say much does it?  Maybe one of the few benchmarks0 >>>for apples-to-apples would be SAP, we'll see. >>>i? >>>But from what we see in realworldtech , Montecito will be noWE >>>slouch.  So maybe he is thinking or comparing Montecito to currenti >>>EV7.r >>I >>Isn't it impressive what the advantage of two full process generations,oJ >>7 years of additional progress in core technology, and several times theH >>chip area can do?  At least as long as you don't want to compare largeH >>systems (but weren't they the niche to which Itanic was supposed to be >>retreating these days?). >> >>- bill >  >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:22:44 -0500r' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com>i. Subject: RE: MemoryChannel VMS Cluster problemR Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB53E9B1@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----< > From: Peter Sjoberg [mailto:peters38@techwiz.ca.nospam]=20  > Sent: January 17, 2005 9:13 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com 0 > Subject: RE: MemoryChannel VMS Cluster problem >=208 > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:25:22 -0500, Main, Kerry wrote: >=20
 > Hi Kerry >=20 > >=20 > >> -----Original Message----->? > >> From: Peter Sjoberg [mailto:peters38@techwiz.ca.nospam]=20e# > >> Sent: January 17, 2005 6:48 AM. > >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com/ > >> Subject: MemoryChannel VMS Cluster problemo > >>=20>   [snip..]   > >=20
 > > Peter, > >=20@ > > As I recall, early on in the VMS V7.3-1 release there was=20 > an issue withgE > > MC interconnects. Are you running the latest patch update for VMSr > > V7.3-1?o@ > Nope, was running unpatched stuff. I headed over to hp.com,=20 > signed up (nop8 > contract needed :) )and downloaded VMS731_PCSI-V0200 &D > VMS731_UPDATE-V0400, and after installing them it worked directly. >=20@ > I don't think it's to many VMS hobbyist that running a OVMS=20 > Alpha clusterrH > with MC in there basement but thanks to your help I'm now one of them.G > Just sad that I probably have to shutdown when spring and heat comes.e >=20 > /ps  > >=20   G'day Peter,  ! Glad to hear you have it working.s  F Re: cluster in basement .. Well, its on my list of things to do, but IG do have a number of Alpha's and a VAX that I plan to cluster with V8.2. E Still in scrounge mode to get an IPF system as well. That includes my>G Alpha 4100 dual EV56 cpu baby that I use as a heater for my basement asu well.t   :-)   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultantr HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477t kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  $ "OpenVMS has always had integrity .. Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .."   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 13:04:32 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)h/ Subject: Re: new.com article about OpenVMS v8.2o3 Message-ID: <1H2e+2g3RS7B@eisner.encompasserve.org>g  f In article <tgSGd.5971$Cr4.2351@news.cpqcorp.net>, Keith Parris <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> writes:  I > It is beneficial to HP for more software vendors (particularly Oracle) fG > to adopt per-socket rather than per-CPU licensing (per-socket is the  H > direction Microsoft has taken). It lowers the cost of the solution to J > the customer. So I don't see HP as being against that by any stretch of  > the imagination.  " What do you mean by "per socket" ?  D Per CPU that _could_ be installed if CPU cards were plugged into the, vacant sockets on a multiprocessor machine ?   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:00:12 GMTf5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger) / Subject: Re: new.com article about OpenVMS v8.2,L Message-ID: <rdeininger-1701051600110001@user-105n93m.dialup.mindspring.com>  I In article <1H2e+2g3RS7B@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.nety (Larry Kilgallen) wrote:  @ >In article <tgSGd.5971$Cr4.2351@news.cpqcorp.net>, Keith Parris& <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> writes: > J >> It is beneficial to HP for more software vendors (particularly Oracle) H >> to adopt per-socket rather than per-CPU licensing (per-socket is the I >> direction Microsoft has taken). It lowers the cost of the solution to sK >> the customer. So I don't see HP as being against that by any stretch of   >> the imagination.p >d# >What do you mean by "per socket" ?y >tE >Per CPU that _could_ be installed if CPU cards were plugged into thel- >vacant sockets on a multiprocessor machine ?o  F Integrity servers have a certain number of CPU sockets. (rx2600 has 2,G rx4640 has 4, for example.)  Each socket connects to the Front Side Bus 8 (CPUs, memory and IO) and can accept one CPU-like thing.  E Current Itanium 2 CPUs have 1 core and are single-threaded.  Thus thel< count of sockets, CPUs, cores, and threads are all the same.  J HP's mx2 processor module combines 2 Itanium 2 CPUs, some extra cache, andF some glue logic in a single module (a CPU-like thing) that fills 1 CPUA socket.  This lets the 4-socket rx4640 hold 8 CPUs (for example).   G Future Itanium CPUs are expected to have multiple cores and/or multipletI threads per core.  If an rx4640 was filled with 4 CPUs, each with 2 coressH and 2 threads/core, it would have 4 physical CPU chips, 8 CPU cores, andI could execute up to 16 code threads simultaneously.  If these same futuretF CPUs were used in something like the mx2, we could see a system with 4* sockets, 8 CPUs, 16 cores, and 32 threads.  E Business folks deciding how to charge for software could in principle-H decide to charge per-socket, per-CPU, per-core, or per-thread.  They canJ also decide to charge only for CPUs actually present (typical for VMS), orF for the maximum number that a system can potentially hold (typical for Oracle).  H Customers seem to prefer per-socket licensing, where the license doesn't( care what you plug into the CPU sockets.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:18:30 GMTa* From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>/ Subject: Re: new.com article about OpenVMS v8.2a2 Message-ID: <GYVGd.5980$3z4.2254@news.cpqcorp.net>  : "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message- news:1H2e+2g3RS7B@eisner.encompasserve.org...eA > In article <tgSGd.5971$Cr4.2351@news.cpqcorp.net>, Keith Parrist& <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> writes:  $ > What do you mean by "per socket" ? >   8 Socket:    A place that you can plug in a processor chipA Core:       A full processor core, a chip might have more than 1. 1 Thread:    A virtual core (SMT, Hyperthread, etc)   6 So.  What is a CPU?  Is it a thread?  A core?  A chip?  7 One trend is to license based on a "chip", which can beo4 represented by the socket.  This might conflict with6 licensing schemes already in place - which for example6 simply look at the number of "CPU"s - when that number7 may actually be the number of threads of execution that , "look" to most software as independent CPUs.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 03:41:03 +0800a From: prep@prep.synonet.com $ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium- Message-ID: <87oefnsv1s.fsf@prep.synonet.com>d  / JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:e   > Tom Linden wrote:t  F >> True, but since Intel has cooled to the Itanium, and they only haveD >> a 3 yearn contractual obligation to HP, one might reasonably ask,@ >> what happens then.  Given the cost of the fab, if they have aF >> captive customer it might be tempting to recoup some of the capital >> investment from them.  E > Intel doesn't have a FAB dedicated to IA64. It uses the same FAB asy > the 8086.2  D > Does anyone know how long it takes to switch product/chip at a FAB> > (say to produce 8086s one day and Alphas the next ?) Is this+ > measured in minutes, hours, days, weeks ?   D > I assume that they have designed the FAbs so that product switches > don't entail long downtimes.   Zero.i  C If they use the same process, they load multiple design wafers into2F the same boat for processing. The fab does not care once the design is final.  B I wonder if they will need a second wafer for itanics this year ;)   -- s< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.k@                                              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: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:48:36 -0500f# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>i$ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium, Message-ID: <bsmdnVRv67Bw93HcRVn-ow@igs.net>   prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:1 > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:, >  >> Tom Linden wrote: >cG >>> True, but since Intel has cooled to the Itanium, and they only havesE >>> a 3 yearn contractual obligation to HP, one might reasonably ask,tA >>> what happens then.  Given the cost of the fab, if they have aaG >>> captive customer it might be tempting to recoup some of the capitale >>> investment from them.s >rF >> Intel doesn't have a FAB dedicated to IA64. It uses the same FAB as >> the 8086. >pE >> Does anyone know how long it takes to switch product/chip at a FAB ? >> (say to produce 8086s one day and Alphas the next ?) Is this , >> measured in minutes, hours, days, weeks ? >oE >> I assume that they have designed the FAbs so that product switchesr >> don't entail long downtimes.g >r > Zero.o >TE > If they use the same process, they load multiple design wafers into H > the same boat for processing. The fab does not care once the design is > final. > D > I wonder if they will need a second wafer for itanics this year ;)  H I hope they give the first one to carly(tm) as her 'going away' present.   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 21:16:44 -06004 From: kaplow_r@encompasserve.org.TRABoD (Bob Kaplow)$ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium3 Message-ID: <a4t5t7QGJT7l@eisner.encompasserve.org>d  R In article <bsmdnVRv67Bw93HcRVn-ow@igs.net>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes:F >> If they use the same process, they load multiple design wafers intoI >> the same boat for processing. The fab does not care once the design isg	 >> final.m >>E >> I wonder if they will need a second wafer for itanics this year ;)t > J > I hope they give the first one to carly(tm) as her 'going away' present.  J They can always take all the duds and stick them onthe cover of the annualJ reports, like they did with the early MVII chips, or make luggage tags out of them at the next DECUS.  1 	Bob Kaplow	NAR # 18L	TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD"2& 		>>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<<K Kaplow Klips & Baffle:	http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdfsL     www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/    www.nira-rocketry.org    www.nar.org  B 	Homeland Security Administration: The Gestapo of the 21st Century   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 21:14:50 -06004 From: kaplow_r@encompasserve.org.TRABoD (Bob Kaplow)$ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium3 Message-ID: <Zi8QSRu9Yr8w@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  f In article <UxQGd.5962$Fp4.5589@news.cpqcorp.net>, Keith Parris <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> writes: > JF Mezei wrote:r@ >> My guess is that Alpha VMS sales will outlive IA64 VMS sales. > J > As Alpha sales are slated to end next year, in 2006, your guess is very  > unlikely.a   When was the last PDP-11 sold?  1 	Bob Kaplow	NAR # 18L	TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" & 		>>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<<K Kaplow Klips & Baffle:	http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf"L     www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/    www.nira-rocketry.org    www.nar.org  B 	Homeland Security Administration: The Gestapo of the 21st Century   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:13:29 -0600s2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>$ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium+ Message-ID: <41EC7ED9.A3B3CB2B@comcast.net>n   Keith Parris wrote:g > [snip]F > Integrity Servers cost less than the equivalent Alpha box (thanks toI > economies of scale). So it's not hard to convince intelligent people ton > purchase them.  H Except for one little detail: if they've never heard of VMS, guess whereD the o.s. purchase dollars go? (Hint: Think of the Pacific Northwest)   -- s David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:5" http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/-  " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/t   Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:30:15 -0500S' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>e$ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium, Message-ID: <41EC90D7.2020005@tsoft-inc.com>   Keith Parris wrote:s   > G > Integrity Servers cost less than the equivalent Alpha box (thanks to rJ > economies of scale). So it's not hard to convince intelligent people to  > purchase them.    / Can you be specific about "economies of scale"?   L This goes back to the claims made when Alpha was "murdered".  (I like to do ) that, it gets some people frothing.)  :-)o   Today's reality is that:  1 IA-64 has not taken over computing at all levels. < Intel and HP have done about faces on IA-64 in workstations.6 Opetron has defied the statements of IA-64 supporters.% IA-64 is a low volume high cost chip.A  L Did Alpha, over it's lifetime, cost as much as IA-64 has had sunk into it's 
 money pit?  H Tell me once again how IA-64 is a better and/or cheaper choice vs Alpha.  L Does an Alpha box really cost more to mfg?  My bet is that HP is charging a O premium for Alpha, since the only customers left don't have any other choices. -O A bit like a MicroVAX 3100 model 98 costing twice as much as an Alpha that was o 10 times faster.   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:02:38 +0100i- From: Alex van Denzel <vandenzel@hotmail.com>z# Subject: Re: Region coded VMS next?w7 Message-ID: <41ec19e1$0$21732$1b2cd167@news.wanadoo.nl>i   John Smith wrote:tN > Soon after the computer arrived from the U.S. he plugged it in. There was "aN > big bang, like an explosion, and white smoke out of the speaker grilles," he > says. The machine then died.  F Probably without reading the warning label "This device is configured  for 110V use only".e   -- Alex.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:17:18 -0500o' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com> # Subject: RE: Region coded VMS next?0R Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB53E9B0@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----9 > From: Alex van Denzel [mailto:vandenzel@hotmail.com]=20e! > Sent: January 17, 2005 12:03 PMF > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com(% > Subject: Re: Region coded VMS next?h >=20 > John Smith wrote:rB > > Soon after the computer arrived from the U.S. he plugged it=20 > in. There was "a> > > big bang, like an explosion, and white smoke out of the=20 > speaker grilles," he  > > says. The machine then died. >=20J > Probably without reading the warning label "This device is configured=20 > for 110V use only".  >=20 > -- > Alex.M  G Actually, since 110V only power supplies would likely be more expensivelF to build when one has a world wide market, I would be really surprisedD if they were not using universal power supplies. They typically haveF 110/220 switch at back of the unit and it is typically covered in someA kind of tape with label warning the user to set the switch to theg: appropriate position depending on what the local power is.  G I suspect the person in the article just set the switch inappropriatelym and paid the consequences.   Regards   
 Kerry Main Solutions Architecto Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co.! Consulting & Integration Services  Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: Kerry.Main@hp.com   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:27:05 +0000 (UTC)t6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)( Subject: Re: Simple EDT or TPU init file0 Message-ID: <newscache$45ahai$qea$1@news.sil.at>  w In article <1105954269.635195.7350@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, "Big John" <john.powers@airwidesolutions.com> writes:e" >Well I can't resist a challenge.. >gA >I decided that I would see if I could do it between the start of = >lunch time and the time the microwave went ping for my food.u >m< >This is what I threw up. (Sorry, put together). I made some
 >assumptions.p- >- 'Double size' means both height and width. : >- 'By default' means it displays it only in that size. No >clever keystroke to toggle it.e >o >Here is BIGVIEW.TPU  K Has anyone thought of the MOTIF Interface of EVE and setting bigger fonts ?0   -- f Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERo% Network and OpenVMS system specialistF E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:25:09 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG  Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit0 Message-ID: <00A3E031.31AFE5E2@SendSpamHere.ORG>  f In article <7uRGd.5970$qc4.3763@news.cpqcorp.net>, Keith Parris <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> writes:H >In article <opsko6iytdzgicya@hyrrokkin>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>  >writes:I >>I once inquired of DSPP how to get the source listings and they did not  >oE >There are two parts to getting VMS Source Listings. First you buy a bH >license (and here being a DSPP member is very valuable, since it gives G >you a 50% discount on this license, IIRC). Once you have the license, oI >you buy an annual subscription to the source listings on CD (since this oB >is a service offering, the DSPP discount is less, maybe 15% off).  H Having just been billed for the source listings which was (and still is)H priced at $65/month, I paid more than I have in the past.  Why?  BecauseH in the past, a discount was applied to my subscription for paying for a H full for a year.  I believe my discount was somethign like $740 comparedH to $780.  Nowhere on the statement do I see a %15 discount for DPSS mem- bership!  F Tell me who to contact to get my %15 discount.  Will HP apply it to myG already paid subscription retroactively?  Or will they tell me I'd justn SOL?   -- :< http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security=                       solutions that others only claim to be.  --  , Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:M   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product! - -- -K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMj   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:44:54 -0800n# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>s  Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit( Message-ID: <opskrk84aazgicya@hyrrokkin>  D On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:25:09 GMT, VAXman- <@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:  C > In article <7uRGd.5970$qc4.3763@news.cpqcorp.net>, Keith Parris  E( > <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> writes:I >> In article <opsko6iytdzgicya@hyrrokkin>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>4
 >> writes:K >>> I once inquired of DSPP how to get the source listings and they did noto >>F >> There are two parts to getting VMS Source Listings. First you buy aI >> license (and here being a DSPP member is very valuable, since it givesmH >> you a 50% discount on this license, IIRC). Once you have the license,J >> you buy an annual subscription to the source listings on CD (since thisD >> is a service offering, the DSPP discount is less, maybe 15% off). >eJ > Having just been billed for the source listings which was (and still is)J > priced at $65/month, I paid more than I have in the past.  Why?  BecauseI > in the past, a discount was applied to my subscription for paying for a1J > full for a year.  I believe my discount was somethign like $740 comparedJ > to $780.  Nowhere on the statement do I see a %15 discount for DPSS mem-
 > bership! > H > Tell me who to contact to get my %15 discount.  Will HP apply it to myI > already paid subscription retroactively?  Or will they tell me I'd just- > SOL?  . What is the part number by which you order it?   >g       -- oC Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/9   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:11:39 -0600o2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>" Subject: Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.3+ Message-ID: <41EC7E6B.4CBA7F3D@comcast.net>d   John Hixson wrote: >  > OK,aJ >      So I got the license for multinet =). Im still unclear as to why itI > was rejecting me, but at least I have it now. I also managed to get thesJ > hobbyist licenses for everything else. However, I see no license for any >   tcp/ip stuff.>   Here's what it looks like:   $ LICENSE REGISTER UCX  -e!         /ACTIVITY=CONSTANT=100  -R1         /AUTHORIZATION=DECUS-USA-xxxxxx-718581  -5!         /DATE=12-JAN-2006       -J         /ISSUER=DECUS   -e         /PRODUCER=DEC   -e)         /TERMINATION=12-JAN-2006        -          /UNITS=0        -i'         /CHECKSUM=x-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx/  B Again, you find this in the "Layered Product" license set, not the OpenVMS license message.  4 > I downloaded the multinet zip file and now I gottaH > figure out a way of getting it on my box =). I only have a serial line2 > connection to it, so this should be interesting.   Yes - rather a challenge...r  G However, if your VMS machine has a CD-ROM, and your PC has a CD-burner,e here's a trick you might try:   F 1. Use a PC version of some unZIPping software to get the savesets out of the .ZIP archive.  D 2. Use your CD burner software to burn an ISO-9660 CD containing the
 savesets.   < 3. Load the CD into your CD-ROM drive, and MOUNT it like so:  7   $ MOUNT/NOASSIST/OVER=ID ddcu/UNDEF=(fixed:none:4096)E  " 4. COPY the savesets down to disk.  G 5. BACKUP should be able to /LIST out the savesets. If it does, you cano6 install using the savesets you copied down from he CD.   -- u David J Dachtera dba DJE Systemst http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:i" 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: 17 Jan 2005 18:50:24 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: vms versus solarisw, Message-ID: <352fnfF4f89pmU1@individual.net>  3 In article <cvEH32MDPPdv@eisner.encompasserve.org>,o> 	koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:Y > In article <351v7tF4f7i00U1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:o >> m? >> Being as all disks store are bytes, VMS is no different.  Itg> >> just has layers on top of the lower levels that present theB >> appearance of more complicated file systems with the associatedA >> overhead and additional latency.  Unix can too, but it doesn'te= >> force the user to live with overhead that he doesn't need.s >> t > G >    If you can find those extra layers in UNIX, please let the rest ofgG >    us know where they are hiding.  In the meantime if you want a bytevJ >    stream file, that's just fine with VMS.  With VMS you get to choose,  >    the OS does not force you.   A The only real difference is the method and the default.  Unix (as A part of it's underlying paradigm) is minimalist.  Start small and 9 add the pieces you want (think Software Tools Paradigm). QA Need fancy record level control, use Postgres or one of the otherAC available "databse" packages.  Too much?  Then try an ISAM package.sA Most users are more than happy with simple text files until theirl: data reaches that point where a DB is the proper solution.   > A >> True.  Often 12 months out of the year.  This is a red herring @ >> and even if it was true, it is not any more.  My Unix servers? >> spend more time available to users than the local VMS boxes.e > : >    Its not a red herring when my Solaris boxes are down.  = I can say the same thing for VMS (except that I don't controld= the VMS systems.  The data center does.  I have to admit that < the various VMS machines I have run in my computer room were< always very stable.  But then, so were my Unix boxes.  Maybe9 it has more to do with the people running the systems [orn politics] than the OS?)t   >  >>   >>> G >>>    5) VMS has user interfaces designed to deal with humans, Solaris2G >>>       has user interfaces designed to be fast when limitted to 110 c >>>       baud >> cF >> Unix has text based command line,  VMS has text based command line,A >> Unix has GUI.  VMS has GUI.  What precisely is the difference?p > I >    The precise difference is "VMS has user interfaces designed to deal c >    with humans,   E So does Unix.  The text based user interface is just a simple programvE itself.  I have seen shells that looked just like MSDOS.  I have seeniB (actually, I wrote one) shells that look and work exactly like theC UCSD Pascal Menu System.  These were intended for use by people whonF were new to Unix but were familiar with those systems.  You know what?D It was usually a very short time before they were abandoned in favorD of the real Unix shells.  Guess they're not as hard to learn as someC people think.  (Of course, it would also be rather trivial to writeAC a shell to mimic the VMS command set as well.  I doubt anyone wouldf	 want it.)V  H >                  Solaris has user interfaces designed to be fast when  >    limitted to 110 baud"  F Hmmmm.....   I've never tried using X at 110 baud.  if Solaris found aI way to make that work theyr better than I thought at Sun.  In fact, whilelF the command set was designed for a time when the communications mediumF was really slow Unix users have found it more than practical enough toE keep.  Remember that Linux thing that everybody (except maybe me!) isnH busy singing the praises of?  How come they kept the same user interfaceF is it's so bad?  By the time Linus Torvalds touched his first computerC I doubt you could find a 1200 badu modem, much less a 110 baud one.f   > C >> Both interfaces on both systems are totally configurable to look1 >> like whatever you want. > C >    Yeah, right, show me where I can get ls to be case insensitivep >    on my Solaris system.  @ It would be trivial to add the necessary part to the parser of aA shell to convert all input to upper-case.  Most Unix users do notu see that as an advantage./   > B >>>    6) VMS is capable of high interupt load real-time computing >>? >> So are some Unix like OSes.  I doubt Solaris is, but then, Is2 >> don't remember seeing Sun claim it was an RTOS. > F >    UNIX like, yes, but the question was VMS vs. Solaris, not VMS vs. >    some UNIX-like OS.O  > Well, Solaris is just SystemV warmed over.  So what is true of- Solaris is true of most other Unixes as well.>  A I guess when you come right down to it, the only place VMS reallyn> wins is this last offering.  :-)  I wonder how many users this truly affects?   >    > C >> And about as biased and wrong as most postings here that compareBH >> VMS and Unix.  And to think someon had the nerve to call the original >> poster a troll. > * >    Bull. You never did like the truth.    A Bull?  Yes, that pretty much describes every effort to talk abouttA Unix vs. VMS.  I have no problem with the truth.  It is primarilyrA the Unix bashers who have a problem with the truth.  The truth isnA that Unix is different than it was 30 years ago.  It is more thanI? ready for primetime.  And there are a hell of a lot more people A getting their real-world work done using Unix than VMS.  And thatM? is never going to change.  The Unix bashing that comes out heree1 reminds me of a story by Aesop about sour grapes.D  H >                                        Just because Solaris meets some8 >    of your needs does not invalidate any of my points.  B Solaris meets all the needs of it's user base.  If it didn't, they would move away from it.    B It's really time people here stopped trying to bash Unix everytimeB this kind of question come us  and just accepted that both VMS andF Unix are more than good enough to satisfy their respective user bases.A Neither is inherently better because they address user bases witheE different needs and desires.  It's like comparing a Ford and a Chevy.vC Their supporters are frequently religous in their support, but whenoB you come right down to it, they are both just cars and perform the same function.   bill  2   -- iJ 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>   l   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 13:01:23 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)o Subject: Re: vms versus solaris 3 Message-ID: <lJc1vHgDZzy5@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  W In article <352demF4gilpkU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:d5 > In article <CUW8FUYxavVy@eisner.encompasserve.org>,n2 > 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:Z >> In article <351v7tF4f7i00U1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:7 >>> In article <Ji9QBpWd$uqT@eisner.encompasserve.org>,1B >>> 	koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: >> j >>>> differences:rI >>>>    1) Solaris is a UNIX, which inherits UNIX late 1960's technology,r) >>>>       VMS dates from the late 1970'so >>> D >>> Or you could say that because it came first UNIX has more than a- >>> decade of additioneal research behind it.n >> B< >> As it turns out, the designers of VMS were aware of Unix. > ( > So is it an advantage or disadvantage?  H It makes your point about there being 10 years more experience with UNIXJ irrelevant.  The originators of VMS were able to mimic UNIX in any respectJ in which it provided a desireable model.  It did not for case-sensitivity,J unreadable command names, restricting file semantics to a stream of bytes, or CLI architecture.   > People here always state. > it as if being older is somehow a bad thing.  / That attitude is not typical in this newsgroup.   F >>>>    2) VMS has a real file system, Solaris only knows byte streams >>> @ >>> Being as all disks store are bytes, VMS is no different.  It >>   >> No, VMS hides it better.d > % > Wether the user wants it to or not.P  D If the user wants cases sensitivity, they can initialize a disk withF that characteristic.  When will Unix provide the ability to initialize a disk so it is case blind ?  I >>                                           One cannot count on anythingeG >> other than the simpleton's "stream of bytes" view of a file on Unix,n2 >> and thus cannot count on robust record locking. > F > There are alternatives that provide records and thus record locking.  @ But one cannot count on them being present on every Unix system.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:14:57 -0800'# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>e Subject: Re: vms versus solarisd( Message-ID: <opskrg27gczgicya@hyrrokkin>  , On 17 Jan 2005 11:52:34 -0600, Bob Koehler  0 <koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org> wrote:  J > In article <opskq9p4olzgicya@hyrrokkin>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>  	 > writes:l >o6 >> Unless you use PL/I which provides an ISAM package. >iH >    Solaris comes with PL/I now?  The last time I looked Solaris didn't! >    even come with a C compiler.r  ! You order the compiler from Lianto   >tF >    We were talking VMS vs. Solaris as OS, not all the things you can >    buy on top of them.  " Just a different way of packaging.   >iA >    Heck, the last time I looked both HP-UX and Solaris had ISAMgD >    capabilities in thier Fortran-77 support in order to claim "VAX >    Fortran" compatability. >l       -- dC Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------   Date: 17 Jan 2005 19:33:52 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: vms versus solaris , Message-ID: <352i90F4gqrnkU1@individual.net>  3 In article <lJc1vHgDZzy5@eisner.encompasserve.org>,e0 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:Y > In article <352demF4gilpkU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:a6 >> In article <CUW8FUYxavVy@eisner.encompasserve.org>,3 >> 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:y[ >>> In article <351v7tF4f7i00U1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:>8 >>>> In article <Ji9QBpWd$uqT@eisner.encompasserve.org>,C >>>> 	koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:. >>>  >>>>> differences:J >>>>>    1) Solaris is a UNIX, which inherits UNIX late 1960's technology,* >>>>>       VMS dates from the late 1970's >>>> rE >>>> Or you could say that because it came first UNIX has more than ar. >>>> decade of additioneal research behind it. >>> = >>> As it turns out, the designers of VMS were aware of Unix.s >>  ) >> So is it an advantage or disadvantage?m > J > It makes your point about there being 10 years more experience with UNIXL > irrelevant.  The originators of VMS were able to mimic UNIX in any respectL > in which it provided a desireable model.  It did not for case-sensitivity,L > unreadable command names, restricting file semantics to a stream of bytes, > or CLI architecture.  ? Preferences of the user base.  Not necessarily better or worse.r? Just different.  Most Unix people I know see case-insensitivity D as a shortcoming, not an advantage.  The command names are perfectlyA readable.  My daughter was comfortably using Unix by the time she2A was 6. (After 19 years she still gets a kick out of playing Rogue>A and Adventure).  A stream of bytes seems to meet the needs of ther@ Unix userbase just fine.  Anything beyond that can be layered onA top of the existing minimalist "stream of bytes".  Not sure abouts? what you mean by CLI Architecture.  Care to explain.  (I looked @ the term up with Google and none of the explanations I saw would) seem to apply to VMS any more than Unix.)    >  >> People here always state / >> it as if being older is somehow a bad thing.c > 1 > That attitude is not typical in this newsgroup.p  4 Excuse me?  Look at the tone of the statement above.G "inherits UNIX late 1960's technology" vs. "dates from the late 1970's" F Makes it sound like Unix is old technology while VMS is somehow newer.H And yet you yourself say that "The originators of VMS were able to mimicD UNIX in any respect in which it provided a desireable model."  WhichD pretty much says they started with the same base.  So why mention it@ at all if your not trying to make it look like VMS being "newer"D somehow gives it an advantage?  Of course, I blame english for this.A I know of a number of cases where tone can make something neutrale) or even meaningfull seem like a bad idea.    > G >>>>>    2) VMS has a real file system, Solaris only knows byte streamst >>>>  A >>>> Being as all disks store are bytes, VMS is no different.  It5 >>>  >>> No, VMS hides it better. >> n& >> Wether the user wants it to or not. > F > If the user wants cases sensitivity, they can initialize a disk withH > that characteristic.  When will Unix provide the ability to initialize > a disk so it is case blind ?  F Probably when enough Unix users actually saw it as an advantage ratherG than a shortcoming (which is to say, never).  When will VMS incorporate@D TCPIP into the kernel?  I assume the answer is the same.  Of course,F there is nothing to prevent you from using only monocase (either upper$ or lower) for everything you do. :-)   > J >>>                                           One cannot count on anythingH >>> other than the simpleton's "stream of bytes" view of a file on Unix,3 >>> and thus cannot count on robust record locking.o >>  G >> There are alternatives that provide records and thus record locking.f > B > But one cannot count on them being present on every Unix system.  ? Well, unless you live under a rock, they are available with any2? web-browser and a couple of quick commands to build and installrB them.  Kind of like TCPIP on a VMS machine.  Not there by default,= even though it is tough to function in the computing industry ? today without it, but easy enough to install.  And you have youpB choice of at least three that I know of.  So, if there is only oneD right way to accomplish any task, why are there three TCPIP packages
 for VMS?  :-)I   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>   a   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 13:11:50 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)U Subject: Re: vms versus solaris 3 Message-ID: <JS3oAdHdwVlo@eisner.encompasserve.org>l  W In article <352fnfF4f89pmU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:a5 > In article <cvEH32MDPPdv@eisner.encompasserve.org>, @ > 	koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:  H >>    If you can find those extra layers in UNIX, please let the rest ofH >>    us know where they are hiding.  In the meantime if you want a byteK >>    stream file, that's just fine with VMS.  With VMS you get to choose, d  >>    the OS does not force you. > C > The only real difference is the method and the default.  Unix (asxC > part of it's underlying paradigm) is minimalist.  Start small andt; > add the pieces you want (think Software Tools Paradigm).  C > Need fancy record level control, use Postgres or one of the otheroE > available "databse" packages.  Too much?  Then try an ISAM package. C > Most users are more than happy with simple text files until theirr< > data reaches that point where a DB is the proper solution.  C With VMS, software vendors can count on underlying mechanisms being F available, but if they are not needed they are paged out of the user's working set.  D >>> Both interfaces on both systems are totally configurable to look >>> like whatever you want.  >>  D >>    Yeah, right, show me where I can get ls to be case insensitive >>    on my Solaris system.e > B > It would be trivial to add the necessary part to the parser of aC > shell to convert all input to upper-case.  Most Unix users do nota > see that as an advantage.   F The question is, how well does the operating system serve the minority who feel otherwise..  C > Bull?  Yes, that pretty much describes every effort to talk aboutlC > Unix vs. VMS.  I have no problem with the truth.  It is primarilyrC > the Unix bashers who have a problem with the truth.  The truth isp2 > that Unix is different than it was 30 years ago.  F And it is also a lot different that Unix is on the next box over since8 Unix suffers from such divergence between manufacturers.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:21:48 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>a Subject: Re: vms versus solarisA, Message-ID: <41EC104C.6040508@tsoft-inc.com>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:  5 > In article <CUW8FUYxavVy@eisner.encompasserve.org>,n2 > 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > Y >>In article <351v7tF4f7i00U1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:e >>6 >>>In article <Ji9QBpWd$uqT@eisner.encompasserve.org>,A >>>	koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:  >>>a >>>>differences:H >>>>   1) Solaris is a UNIX, which inherits UNIX late 1960's technology,( >>>>      VMS dates from the late 1970's >>>>C >>>Or you could say that because it came first UNIX has more than as, >>>decade of additioneal research behind it. >>> ; >>As it turns out, the designers of VMS were aware of Unix.a >> > B > So is it an advantage or disadvantage?  People here always stateD > it as if being older is somehow a bad thing.  As if, at some magicA > point in time, all researech and development for Unix came to at > stop while VMS moved forward,a >  > E >>>>   2) VMS has a real file system, Solaris only knows byte streams  >>>>? >>>Being as all disks store are bytes, VMS is no different.  Its >>>e >>No, VMS hides it better. >> > % > Wether the user wants it to or not.n    O No, can't say that.  Using QIO you have access to files without any of the RMS tO overhead.  You can implement whatever type of file handling you wish, and have o> the DLM to easily implement whatever type of locking you wish.    > >>>just has layers on top of the lower levels that present theB >>>appearance of more complicated file systems with the associatedA >>>overhead and additional latency.  Unix can too, but it doesn't = >>>force the user to live with overhead that he doesn't need.p >>>m- >>Unix _could_, but in general it does not.  r >> > D > Which is, of course, what it's users want.  Don't burden everybody > to the advantage a few.  >  > H >>                                          One cannot count on anythingF >>other than the simpleton's "stream of bytes" view of a file on Unix,1 >>and thus cannot count on robust record locking.p >> > F > There are alternatives that provide records and thus record locking.    O Can you be a bit more definitive about "thus record locking"?  Care to look at eN it in a multi-system configuration?  With the exception of some IBM software, Q I'm not aware of anything that can be considered in the same catagory as the VMS v DLM.    E > When Unix users need this feature they use it.  But more oftne thanoB > not, they don't need it.  Neither do they need the overhead such > systems bring with them.    P As mentioned before, using the QIO interface, VMS can also do low overhead I/O. O   The difference is with Unix, usually one must acquire additional capability, s; with associated costs, while the capability is part of VMS.e    ; >>>>   3) VMS has security, Solaris claims to have securitym >>>>E >>>>   4) VMS has reliability such as uptime in decades, Solaris wills& >>>>      sometimes stay up for months >>>>A >>>True.  Often 12 months out of the year.  This is a red herringd@ >>>and even if it was true, it is not any more.  My Unix servers? >>>spend more time available to users than the local VMS boxes.s >>> ; >>How many years of continuous uptime for a single system ?4 >> > A > Considering that I (and I am sure many others) can not count onNA > the power staying up that long, what's the point? I have UltrixrA > machines at home that only go down when the power company fallshF > down on the job.  We have places locally (including many businesses)D > that are just coming out of nearly two weeks of no power.  I doubt* > they make a UPS that could outlast that. >  > A >>Feel free to quote the world record, not just your own systems.t >> > @ > Meaningless.  Just like the Irish Railway "perpetual VAX" that@ > int he end turned out to not be a single machine at all.  If IE > (or my sers) cared, I could even do rolling upgrades of my hardwarerF > (for now, I only do that for OS upgrades) and have the same "system"D > records.  But the target is to meet my users needs.  Anything elseB > is useless marketing.  Which, makes you wonder why anyone bother# > for VMS as there is no marketing.r > E > Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with VMS.  There is alsoAD > nothing wrong with Unix.  They both meet the needs of their users. > That is all that matters.0 >  > bill >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:44:39 -0800a# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>8 Subject: Re: vms versus solarisn( Message-ID: <opskrigpolzgicya@hyrrokkin>  J On 17 Jan 2005 12:54:07 -0500, Rob Brooks <brooks@cuebid.zko.dec.nospam>   wrote:  ' > "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes:I3 >> Rob Brooks <brooks@cuebid.zko.dec.nospam> wrote:d >xK >>> While I didn't work on the port to I64, I can say with a high degree of1L >>> confidence that little, if anything, made it back into the VAX code as   >>> atE >>> result of the porting work.  The two source pools are so widely  E
 >>> divergent.J >>> by now that it's highly unlikely any VAX-related problems would have   >>> been9 >>> found and fixed as a result of the Alpha to I64 work.C >>>y+ >> Are Alpha and I64 the same source pools?o >1C > Yes, although certain components are not shared between the two  c > architectures.I > For instance, anything to do with images and object files is completely 7 > separate, since the I64 uses ELF object/image format.t >sG > However, it is a single source pool for Alpha and I64.  The multipathsJ > subsystem (written in C), for example, is completely identical between   > AlphalJ > and I64; there is not even any conditional compilation.  The shadowing   > driverK > (which used to be common across VAX and Alpha up until about a year ago  m > and isF > written in MACRO-32) is common across Alpha and I64, with just a fewJ > differences due to conditional compilation (because of the differences   > in the* > calling standard between Alpha and I64). >oK > The way that the shadowing driver was kept "common" between VAX and AlphaSK > was by a rather torturous set of macros that attempted to isolate the VAX0J > and Alpha differences.  It made maintenance a real pain, as the driver   > was G > so heavily conditonally compiled that it made following the code flowr? > a real challenge and we decided to make the driver VAX- and  n > Alpha/I64-specific2 > during the work for Host-Based Minimerge (HBMM). > K So will 8.2 for the VAX, which I understand is the last one, be lacking anyo. functionality othrwise found it Alpha version?       -- AC Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/i   ------------------------------   Date: 17 Jan 2005 19:53:12 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: vms versus solarisr, Message-ID: <352jd8F4gnd6lU1@individual.net>  , In article <41EC104C.6040508@tsoft-inc.com>,* 	Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote: > 6 >> In article <CUW8FUYxavVy@eisner.encompasserve.org>,3 >> 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:  >> aZ >>>In article <351v7tF4f7i00U1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>>t7 >>>>In article <Ji9QBpWd$uqT@eisner.encompasserve.org>, B >>>>	koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: >>>> >>>>>differences:eI >>>>>   1) Solaris is a UNIX, which inherits UNIX late 1960's technology,2) >>>>>      VMS dates from the late 1970'sl >>>>>lD >>>>Or you could say that because it came first UNIX has more than a- >>>>decade of additioneal research behind it.w >>>>< >>>As it turns out, the designers of VMS were aware of Unix. >>>  >>  C >> So is it an advantage or disadvantage?  People here always stateaE >> it as if being older is somehow a bad thing.  As if, at some magicaB >> point in time, all researech and development for Unix came to a  >> stop while VMS moved forward, >> - >> -F >>>>>   2) VMS has a real file system, Solaris only knows byte streams >>>>>i@ >>>>Being as all disks store are bytes, VMS is no different.  It >>>> >>>No, VMS hides it better.@ >>>c >> e& >> Wether the user wants it to or not. >  > Q > No, can't say that.  Using QIO you have access to files without any of the RMS  Q > overhead.  You can implement whatever type of file handling you wish, and have h@ > the DLM to easily implement whatever type of locking you wish.  B But which is the default when I say "OPEN" in Pascal or some other> language? Yes, you can get around RMS, but VMS starts with theB everything including the kitchen sink.  Unix starts with the least< and lets the user add on additional requirements.  Different> approaches to the same problem caused by the difference in the; underlying paradigm of the OS.  Neither one is better, juste
 different.   >  > ? >>>>just has layers on top of the lower levels that present theeC >>>>appearance of more complicated file systems with the associatedhB >>>>overhead and additional latency.  Unix can too, but it doesn't> >>>>force the user to live with overhead that he doesn't need. >>>>. >>>Unix _could_, but in general it does not.   >>>s >>  E >> Which is, of course, what it's users want.  Don't burden everybodyn >> to the advantage a few. >> o >> nI >>>                                          One cannot count on anythingeG >>>other than the simpleton's "stream of bytes" view of a file on Unix, 2 >>>and thus cannot count on robust record locking. >>>5 >> 7G >> There are alternatives that provide records and thus record locking.  >  > P > Can you be a bit more definitive about "thus record locking"? Care to look at P > it in a multi-system configuration?  With the exception of some IBM software, S > I'm not aware of anything that can be considered in the same catagory as the VMS I > DLM.  J First, in order to have useful "record locking" you have to have somethingJ that handles data as records.  It has already been stated (and accepted byF the Unix camp) that the default file system is just a stream of bytes.D As for multi-system configurations, I freely admit that no Unix I amH aware of can do what VMS does in that arena.  However, because everybodyK isn't flocking to VMS from Unix, apparently it isn't really that important. F But, instead of trying to point out all these non-existant Unix short-D comings maybe it wold be better if you just pointed out what VMS canC do that Unix can't.  That way you win and people who know the truth-D about Unix won't laugh behind your back after you have left the room& from a loosing sales presentation. :-)   >  > F >> When Unix users need this feature they use it.  But more oftne thanC >> not, they don't need it.  Neither do they need the overhead suchw >> systems bring with them.t >  > R > As mentioned before, using the QIO interface, VMS can also do low overhead I/O. Q >   The difference is with Unix, usually one must acquire additional capability, M= > with associated costs, while the capability is part of VMS.a  A Associated costs?  How much does Postgres cost?  Large amounts ofn@ Unix software is available for the taking.  Again, difference inA philosophy.  I will put any package my users need (within reason, A you won't find Doom) on our Unix servers.  The people who run thei; VMS system will not even put up stuff from the Freeware CD.i   bill   -- aJ 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>   a   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:09:28 GMTc  From: CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net> Subject: Re: vms versus solarisd* Message-ID: <41EC1B78.4050803@prodigy.net>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:Y > In article <352fnfF4f89pmU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:o <snip> > H > And it is also a lot different that Unix is on the next box over since: > Unix suffers from such divergence between manufacturers.  G At least there _are_ multiple manufacturers, so not all the eggs are ina one basket.(   -- ID The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt toC minimize spam.  Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.S   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:46:55 +0100J0 From: Keith Cayemberg <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de> Subject: Re: vms versus solaris0B Message-ID: <41ec2440$0$27816$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>   JF Mezei wrote:    > Keith Cayemberg wrote: > J >>I have a recent list of 26 major companies producing Automobiles or Auto3 >>Parts which are using OpenVMS in their factories.o >>H >>In the category Steel and Metal Industry I have 24 majors listed which >>are using OpenVMS today. >  > I > So, if HP mentions "manufacturing" as one of the remaining niches wheree= > VMS still has a presence, wouldn't that include the above ?b  C Yes, I suppose that would include the above. It would also include e8 several other categories in my OpenVMS Customers list...  C   2   Aluminium Industry (not included in Steel and Metal Industry)  11   Chemical Industry 10   Chip Manufacturing  12   Electronics Industry    4   Glass Industry 11   Machinery and Componentsn2 12   Paper, Packaging and Forest Products Industry   8   Pharmaceuticals    3   Textile Industry  H > What would be nice is if enough of those customers were willing to let  I Yes, it would be nice. But, only if their management were solidly behind tG their use of OpenVMS. Otherwise an announcement of their dependence on I> OpenVMS would make them potentially successful targets of VMS B competitors, thus hurting the VMS market. For this reason I avoid F announcing providing my list to the public. Only company insiders can H weigh the pros and cons of publicizing that companies' strategic use of 
 a technology.R  F If I list a company specifically as an OpenVMS customer, it's because I that company has already ostensibly decided to make a public announce or .I testimonial which includes their use of OpenVMS. Usually, I will provide nE a web link which proves this. I don't consider the inclusion of this .G information in a resum on the Internet as a condolence by the company l to publicize their VMS use.T  E > ue use their names from time to time as a reference site. This way,CJ > instead of constantly mentioning Cerner and some other customer over andH > over again, the little VMS marketing that happens could vary the namesJ > of customers from a longer list. Over time, readers would see that it isG > more than 2 remaining customers and that there is still a fairly welle > spread out base of customers.   F Anybody can produce a list such as mine, if they research the various I industries long enough. Most of this is hidden somewhere in the Internet iG (of Christmas' Past or Present :-), where I found it within the last 8 oB years. I will eventually publish a list of the well-known OpenVMS F customers which have made formally condoned testimonials to such with D Internet references. The list is currently about 100 companies long.   Cheers!t   Keith CayembergC   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:23:40 GMTd* From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> Subject: Re: vms versus solarisE2 Message-ID: <w1WGd.5981$9A4.2103@news.cpqcorp.net>  . "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message" news:opskra4oh3zgicya@hyrrokkin... > >y* > Are Alpha and I64 the same source pools? >h  @ Yes.  In fact all the builds leading up to V8.2 have been paired9 (one Alpha, one I64) all from the same CMS source.  There/9 are some differences in specific areas - of course.  Somee1 via conditional code, some via different modules.P   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 15:58:57 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)  Subject: Re: vms versus solarisr3 Message-ID: <wB94RFl$BUyo@eisner.encompasserve.org>v  W In article <352demF4gilpkU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:v5 > In article <CUW8FUYxavVy@eisner.encompasserve.org>,c2 > 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: >> t< >> As it turns out, the designers of VMS were aware of Unix. > B > So is it an advantage or disadvantage?  People here always stateD > it as if being older is somehow a bad thing.  As if, at some magicA > point in time, all researech and development for Unix came to at > stop while VMS moved forward,t  @    VMS took some of the best ideas from UNIX and used them, likeD    a hierachy of directories.  VMS also used a more advanced design,D    with multiple modes, an RMS, English based command language, and F    without process forking.  You can compare UNIX to TOPS-10 and -20, F    who's kernels are two mode, have no built-in RMS, and have process H    forking.  Except that TOPS-10 command lines made sense to programmers#    and TOPS-20's was English based.   G    Late in the TOPS-20 life, DEC couldn't see why they were maintainingSF    record access code in the Fortran OTS, the COBOL OTS, ..., and made;    one single set of routines that they then called an RMS.c  D    UNIX still has that late-60's design with two modes, no standard I    RMS (which just means Fortran, COBOL, Ada, ... all have to roll their r1    own), process forking, and illegible commands.t   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 16:00:04 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)  Subject: Re: vms versus solaris 3 Message-ID: <KxU1R6m88Vkd@eisner.encompasserve.org>a  W In article <352dkgF4gilpkU2@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:.C > Hmmmmm.   Wonder how truly difficult it would be to implement RMSnB > on Unix?  I wonder if people would actually use it?  Has FreeVMS! > done a free version of RMS yet?t  H    Why don't you ask the guys who already do it for Fortran, COBOL, Ada,    ...   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 16:08:19 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)t Subject: Re: vms versus solaris 3 Message-ID: <ttHmLaA6qt8w@eisner.encompasserve.org>l  W In article <352fnfF4f89pmU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:h > 9 > The only real difference is the method and the default.r  ?   The real difference is the UNIX file system hasn't got a clue A   what a record is.  Why may be fine for all those C programmers,I:   since they wouldn't know how to use one, but is not what?   "most users" want.  See the C FAQ on how to rewrite a record.t'   Somebody must be asking if its a FAQ.i    ? > I can say the same thing for VMS (except that I don't controlt? > the VMS systems.  The data center does.  I have to admit thate> > the various VMS machines I have run in my computer room were> > always very stable.  But then, so were my Unix boxes.  Maybe; > it has more to do with the people running the systems [orm > politics] than the OS?)   D    People running the systems have a very heavy impact.  But we haveB    a group of people heavily trained in Solaris who can't keep the@    things up.  Meanwhile the VMS systems they admin just keep on    keeping on.   >> kJ >>    The precise difference is "VMS has user interfaces designed to deal  >>    with humans, r >  > So does Unix.  i  G    No it doesn't.  You have to add it, and you can't count on it alwayslG    being there.  There's a couuple of commercial DCL products for UNIX, C    there's been MCR, csh, Bourne shell, Posix shell, and others forsE    VMS.  But what ships in UNIX isn't English based and what ships ini
    VMS is.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:08:35 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>a Subject: Re: vms versus solaris , Message-ID: <3IudnYo-79LDqnHcRVn-3g@igs.net>   Bob Koehler wrote:E > In article <352demF4gilpkU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Billd > Gunshannon) writes:n6 >> In article <CUW8FUYxavVy@eisner.encompasserve.org>,2 >> Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: >>> = >>> As it turns out, the designers of VMS were aware of Unix.  >>C >> So is it an advantage or disadvantage?  People here always stateaE >> it as if being older is somehow a bad thing.  As if, at some magic.B >> point in time, all researech and development for Unix came to a  >> stop while VMS moved forward, > B >    VMS took some of the best ideas from UNIX and used them, likeF >    a hierachy of directories.  VMS also used a more advanced design,E >    with multiple modes, an RMS, English based command language, and:G >    without process forking.  You can compare UNIX to TOPS-10 and -20,tG >    who's kernels are two mode, have no built-in RMS, and have process.> >    forking.  Except that TOPS-10 command lines made sense to1 >    programmers and TOPS-20's was English based.  >t= >    Late in the TOPS-20 life, DEC couldn't see why they weretF >    maintaining record access code in the Fortran OTS, the COBOL OTS,F >    ..., and made one single set of routines that they then called an > RMS. >iE >    UNIX still has that late-60's design with two modes, no standardrD >    RMS (which just means Fortran, COBOL, Ada, ... all have to roll9 >    their own), process forking, and illegible commands.r    H Bottom line is that most unix weenies, ie. people mostly under 40, don'tL know that there are things out there other than 'stream of bytes' except for rdmbs and oodbms products.  F They get taught about 1.5 days of instruction in university about ISAMI theory, do 2 coding exercise assignments worth 6% of their term mark, andmA that is....back to stream of bytes for the rest of their careers.e   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 16:18:12 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)f Subject: Re: vms versus solarise3 Message-ID: <SSUiMRQT+GfB@eisner.encompasserve.org>b  W In article <352jd8F4gnd6lU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:u. > In article <41EC104C.6040508@tsoft-inc.com>,, > 	Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:  S >> As mentioned before, using the QIO interface, VMS can also do low overhead I/O.  R >>   The difference is with Unix, usually one must acquire additional capability, > >> with associated costs, while the capability is part of VMS. > 1 > Associated costs?  How much does Postgres cost?s  
 Considerable.   J Unless you are someone who calculates the value of their own time as zero.   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Jan 2005 16:19:50 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)a Subject: Re: vms versus solarism3 Message-ID: <IACZhTiosLEH@eisner.encompasserve.org>s  M In article <41EC1B78.4050803@prodigy.net>, CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net> writes:a > Larry Kilgallen wrote:Z >> In article <352fnfF4f89pmU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > <snip> >> :I >> And it is also a lot different that Unix is on the next box over sinces; >> Unix suffers from such divergence between manufacturers.> > I > At least there _are_ multiple manufacturers, so not all the eggs are ine
 > one basket.>  < The problem is that with Unix there are varying definitions.; One might as well say that there are multiple manufacturerse= of something called "operating systems" and leave it at that.    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:30:54 GMTd  From: CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net> Subject: Re: vms versus solaris * Message-ID: <41EC3C9E.5000208@prodigy.net>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:O > In article <41EC1B78.4050803@prodigy.net>, CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net> writes:f >  >>Larry Kilgallen wrote: >>Z >>>In article <352fnfF4f89pmU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >> >><snip> >>I >>>And it is also a lot different that Unix is on the next box over sincet; >>>Unix suffers from such divergence between manufacturers.e >>I >>At least there _are_ multiple manufacturers, so not all the eggs are ine
 >>one basket.n >  > > > The problem is that with Unix there are varying definitions.= > One might as well say that there are multiple manufacturers,? > of something called "operating systems" and leave it at that.   @ Doing so doesn't help your argument that VMS is somehow special.   --  D The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt toC minimize spam.  Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.n   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:25:53 -0500l) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>c Subject: Re: vms versus solarisu9 Message-ID: <bQXGd.8543$K03.373654@news20.bellglobal.com>-  6 "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message & news:352fnfF4f89pmU1@individual.net...5 > In article <cvEH32MDPPdv@eisner.encompasserve.org>,r? > koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:l [...snip...] >sC > The only real difference is the method and the default.  Unix (asaC > part of it's underlying paradigm) is minimalist.  Start small ands: > add the pieces you want (think Software Tools Paradigm).C > Need fancy record level control, use Postgres or one of the other E > available "databse" packages.  Too much?  Then try an ISAM package. C > Most users are more than happy with simple text files until theiru< > data reaches that point where a DB is the proper solution. >n  L I agree. This minimalist approach also allows for some pretty cool embedded , applications with a UNIX kernel at the core.K People forget that UNIX (as well as "C") became the defacto standard OS in rK colleges and universities not just because it was cheap or the source code -L was available for students to look at and modify, but because it was easier J to teach OS concepts with it. Once you understand the basic stuff you can F begin to add layers of complexity as required. Having optional add-on M modules allows layered products to be maintained independently by a teams of UK wildly dispersed people (one of the reasons the open source movement is so   successful)@  L On a related note, I remember a discussion with my cousin (a "C" programmer J at a big insurance company in Canada) a few years back; during a Heineken J induce debate I stated "C isn't a high level language!" and his reply was H "It is when you include the libraries!". He was right; the "C" language L doesn't have i/o but it does when you include "stdio.h". Over all you can't H knock "C" because it always seems to be the first thing ported to a new K platform. The point of all this drivel is that even the language that UNIX d7 is written in was developed with a minimalist approach.   
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.8 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:16:52 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>m Subject: Re: vms versus solarisi( Message-ID: <opskru2en6zgicya@hyrrokkin>  G On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:25:53 -0500, Neil Rieck <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>  m wrote:  D > On a related note, I remember a discussion with my cousin (a "C"   > programmerK > at a big insurance company in Canada) a few years back; during a Heineken-K > induce debate I stated "C isn't a high level language!" and his reply wasrI > "It is when you include the libraries!". He was right; the "C" language I > doesn't have i/o but it does when you include "stdio.h". Over all you  e > can'tAI > knock "C" because it always seems to be the first thing ported to a new I > platform. The point of all this drivel is that even the language that  e > UNIX9 > is written in was developed with a minimalist approach.   K There is more to a high-level language than that.  How about strong typing,oJ lexical scoping and inheritance, on conditions, real I/O, just to name a   few.K How does he do decimal arithmetic (something insurance companies must do)  t in C?s   -- pC Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/m   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:11:53 -0500 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>e Subject: Re: vms versus solarise9 Message-ID: <jvYGd.8879$K03.384433@news20.bellglobal.com>e  B One big difference (if I'm not mistaken) is that OpenVMS supports K quota-based resource management while UNIX and Windows do not. This allows eL processes in UNIX to do many weird things like spawn off a zillion daughter 2 processes or allocate a huge amount of memory etc.  
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,h Ontario, Canada.8 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:35:58 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>  Subject: Re: vms versus solarisI, Message-ID: <41EC67EB.8166A532@teksavvy.com>   Neil Rieck wrote:nM > On a related note, I remember a discussion with my cousin (a "C" programmere  D Oh my.... you have a C programmer in your family ? Shock... horror !  C C programs much better reflect a programmer's discipline than otherU? languages exactly because it doesn't force the programmer to bei
 disciplined.    H I expect the C code written by the VMS engineers to be very professionalG and clean. (see FreK, I don't always say negative things :-).  I am notuD so sure that the various versions of Unix have code witten with same amount of quality.   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Jan 2005 03:14:54 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: vms versus solarisn, Message-ID: <353d9eF4heoajU2@individual.net>  , In article <3IudnYo-79LDqnHcRVn-3g@igs.net>,& 	"John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes: > E > Bottom line is that most unix weenies, ie. people mostly under 40, n  B Bull crap.  I haven't seen 40 in a long, long time.  And before itC deteriorated USENIX used to be mostly people older than I am.  Now,l& if you really meant Linux weenies.....  J >                                                                    don'tN > know that there are things out there other than 'stream of bytes' except for > rdmbs and oodbms products. > H > They get taught about 1.5 days of instruction in university about ISAMK > theory, do 2 coding exercise assignments worth 6% of their term mark, andmC > that is....back to stream of bytes for the rest of their careers.|  nH If a stream of bytes can do the job why force everybody to use something; else to satisfy that one person who might actually need it?    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>   s   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:40:09 -0500o) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>e Subject: Re: vms versus solarisi: Message-ID: <kG_Gd.18121$W33.617684@news20.bellglobal.com>  ; "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message t& news:41EC67EB.8166A532@teksavvy.com... > Neil Rieck wrote:tD >> On a related note, I remember a discussion with my cousin (a "C" 
 >> programmer  >hF > Oh my.... you have a C programmer in your family ? Shock... horror ! >    ???d  
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.8 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Jan 2005 03:07:42 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: vms versus solarise, Message-ID: <353cruF4heoajU1@individual.net>  3 In article <SSUiMRQT+GfB@eisner.encompasserve.org>,h0 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:Y > In article <352jd8F4gnd6lU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:g/ >> In article <41EC104C.6040508@tsoft-inc.com>,t- >> 	Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:e > T >>> As mentioned before, using the QIO interface, VMS can also do low overhead I/O. S >>>   The difference is with Unix, usually one must acquire additional capability, a? >>> with associated costs, while the capability is part of VMS.i >> t2 >> Associated costs?  How much does Postgres cost? >  > Considerable.h > L > Unless you are someone who calculates the value of their own time as zero.  F Intersting.  I value my time highly, but it takes less than 15 minutes* of my time to build an install Postgres.    F And if the time it takes to install is another consideration, how long: does it take to install VMS?  How long to install Solaris?     bill   -- gJ 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>   t   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Jan 2005 03:24:52 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: vms versus solarisv, Message-ID: <353ds4F4heoajU4@individual.net>  ( In article <opskru2en6zgicya@hyrrokkin>,& 	"Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes:I > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:25:53 -0500, Neil Rieck <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>  W > wrote: > E >> On a related note, I remember a discussion with my cousin (a "C"  e
 >> programmer L >> at a big insurance company in Canada) a few years back; during a HeinekenL >> induce debate I stated "C isn't a high level language!" and his reply wasJ >> "It is when you include the libraries!". He was right; the "C" languageJ >> doesn't have i/o but it does when you include "stdio.h". Over all you   >> can'tJ >> knock "C" because it always seems to be the first thing ported to a newJ >> platform. The point of all this drivel is that even the language that   >> UNIXo: >> is written in was developed with a minimalist approach. > M > There is more to a high-level language than that.  How about strong typing, L > lexical scoping and inheritance, on conditions, real I/O, just to name a   > few.M > How does he do decimal arithmetic (something insurance companies must do)    > in C?t   Probably with a library.  :-)t   bill  O -- hJ 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: 18 Jan 2005 03:22:46 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: vms versus solaris , Message-ID: <353do6F4heoajU3@individual.net>  3 In article <ttHmLaA6qt8w@eisner.encompasserve.org>,n> 	koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:Y > In article <352fnfF4f89pmU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:  >>  K >>>    The precise difference is "VMS has user interfaces designed to deal n >>>    with humans,  >> f >> So does Unix.   > I >    No it doesn't.  You have to add it, and you can't count on it alwaysvI >    being there.  There's a couuple of commercial DCL products for UNIX, E >    there's been MCR, csh, Bourne shell, Posix shell, and others fortG >    VMS.  But what ships in UNIX isn't English based and what ships ino >    VMS is.  n( So, I'm not human?  Thanks a lot.... :-)  F How about my users?  There are more unix users than VMS.  None of them
 are human?  F Unix is just as much english as VMS is, just shorter.  But then, maybeE you don't think things like St., Ave., can't, won't, etc. are englishQ or intended for humans either.   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>   b   ------------------------------   Date: 18 Jan 2005 03:29:25 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: vms versus solarisi, Message-ID: <353e4lF4heoajU5@individual.net>  9 In article <jvYGd.8879$K03.384433@news20.bellglobal.com>,l, 	"Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> writes:D > One big difference (if I'm not mistaken) is that OpenVMS supports M > quota-based resource management while UNIX and Windows do not. This allows eN > processes in UNIX to do many weird things like spawn off a zillion daughter 4 > processes or allocate a huge amount of memory etc. >   A If you mean that Unix does not have the ability to control/limit eD things like number of user processes, max file size, amout of memory used, you are just plain wrong.    bill   -- fJ 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>   l   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:37:38 -0500n- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>a Subject: Re: vms versus solarisA, Message-ID: <41EC8466.D1702D22@teksavvy.com>   Neil Rieck wrote:aH > > Oh my.... you have a C programmer in your family ? Shock... horror !   > ???     H Sorry, C is often portrayed by some as some evil dangerous language with+ C programmers considered satan worshippers.   ) And yes, I am guilty of programming in C.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:59:06 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>R Subject: Re: vms versus solarisD, Message-ID: <41EC898A.2000801@tsoft-inc.com>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:  5 > In article <SSUiMRQT+GfB@eisner.encompasserve.org>,n2 > 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > Y >>In article <352jd8F4gnd6lU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:h >>/ >>>In article <41EC104C.6040508@tsoft-inc.com>,y- >>>	Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:  >>>>T >>>>As mentioned before, using the QIO interface, VMS can also do low overhead I/O. S >>>>  The difference is with Unix, usually one must acquire additional capability,  ? >>>>with associated costs, while the capability is part of VMS.  >>>>2 >>>Associated costs?  How much does Postgres cost? >>>g >>Considerable.n >>L >>Unless you are someone who calculates the value of their own time as zero. >> > H > Intersting.  I value my time highly, but it takes less than 15 minutes, > of my time to build an install Postgres.   > H > And if the time it takes to install is another consideration, how long< > does it take to install VMS?  How long to install Solaris? >  >  > bill >  >   5 I've never installed Solaris.  How long does it take?   Q I've never timed it, but I can probably install VMS on an AlphaStation 200 4/233  = in about 15 minutes.  A faster system might reduce that time.,  N Now as to configuring the system to my liking after the OS is installed, that N could take some more time.  I doubt any longer than doing the same on Solaris.   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:55:22 -0500e' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>t Subject: Re: vms versus solarisi, Message-ID: <41EC88AA.6040702@tsoft-inc.com>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:    & >>>Wether the user wants it to or not. >>>l >>Q >>No, can't say that.  Using QIO you have access to files without any of the RMS  Q >>overhead.  You can implement whatever type of file handling you wish, and have l@ >>the DLM to easily implement whatever type of locking you wish. >> > D > But which is the default when I say "OPEN" in Pascal or some other@ > language? Yes, you can get around RMS, but VMS starts with theD > everything including the kitchen sink.  Unix starts with the least> > and lets the user add on additional requirements.  Different@ > approaches to the same problem caused by the difference in the= > underlying paradigm of the OS.  Neither one is better, just> > different.    L When you say "OPEN" in Pascal, you're now talking about what a language and J compiler offer, not what the OS offers.  What happens when you open a VMS M channel to a file from Pascal?  You can now do I/O at the QIO level.  What's t your point?c      G >>>There are alternatives that provide records and thus record locking.a >>>e >>P >>Can you be a bit more definitive about "thus record locking"? Care to look at P >>it in a multi-system configuration?  With the exception of some IBM software, S >>I'm not aware of anything that can be considered in the same catagory as the VMS > >>DLM. >> > L > First, in order to have useful "record locking" you have to have somethingL > that handles data as records.  It has already been stated (and accepted byH > the Unix camp) that the default file system is just a stream of bytes.    O So Ok, from within a program on Unix, I implement code that treats the file as oN records, calculating the record offset and bytecount and such.  Now, how do I P take out a lock on the string of bytes I am accessing that will be respected by < cooperating programs?  On VMS I can very easily use the DLM.    F > As for multi-system configurations, I freely admit that no Unix I amJ > aware of can do what VMS does in that arena.  However, because everybodyM > isn't flocking to VMS from Unix, apparently it isn't really that important.e    P Maybe Unix users have given up, or have devised workarounds, or don't even know Q that such is possible.  All three possibilities make their work harder, and less o useful.b    H > But, instead of trying to point out all these non-existant Unix short-F > comings maybe it wold be better if you just pointed out what VMS canE > do that Unix can't.  That way you win and people who know the trutheF > about Unix won't laugh behind your back after you have left the room( > from a loosing sales presentation. :-)    
 Partial list:r   Distributed Lock Manager Robust development environment.i
 VAX/DEC BASICeI Clustering, as it was originally defined, shared everything, not fallover> DECnet  C Since I don't know Unix, some of the following may not be VMS only:d   Global sectionst# Access to system calls outside of C, Logicals Symbols'	 Mailboxest     >  >>F >>>When Unix users need this feature they use it.  But more oftne thanC >>>not, they don't need it.  Neither do they need the overhead sucht >>>systems bring with them.f    O How about, they don't use some features because they don't have them available?   R >>As mentioned before, using the QIO interface, VMS can also do low overhead I/O. Q >>  The difference is with Unix, usually one must acquire additional capability, k= >>with associated costs, while the capability is part of VMS.  >> > C > Associated costs?  How much does Postgres cost?  Large amounts of B > Unix software is available for the taking.  Again, difference inC > philosophy.  I will put any package my users need (within reason,sC > you won't find Doom) on our Unix servers.  The people who run the)= > VMS system will not even put up stuff from the Freeware CD.r >l    Q What some people will put on Unix, and what others will put on VMS, doesn't seem e8 to have anything to do with a discussion on OS features.     Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:10:43 -0500i' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>i Subject: Re: vms versus solarise, Message-ID: <41EC8C43.2080309@tsoft-inc.com>   Tom Linden wrote:T  I > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:25:53 -0500, Neil Rieck <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>    > wrote: > E >> On a related note, I remember a discussion with my cousin (a "C"   
 >> programmerxL >> at a big insurance company in Canada) a few years back; during a HeinekenL >> induce debate I stated "C isn't a high level language!" and his reply wasJ >> "It is when you include the libraries!". He was right; the "C" languageJ >> doesn't have i/o but it does when you include "stdio.h". Over all you   >> can'tJ >> knock "C" because it always seems to be the first thing ported to a newJ >> platform. The point of all this drivel is that even the language that   >> UNIXw: >> is written in was developed with a minimalist approach. >  > M > There is more to a high-level language than that.  How about strong typing, I > lexical scoping and inheritance, on conditions, real I/O, just to name  	 > a  few.tH > How does he do decimal arithmetic (something insurance companies must  > do)  in C? >   N Simple.  You write or acquire some library routines.  No language/compiler is . perfect.  None of them provide for everything.   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:05:06 -0500-' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>c Subject: Re: vms versus solaris>, Message-ID: <41EC8AF2.3000808@tsoft-inc.com>  
 CJT wrote:   > Larry Kilgallen wrote: > G >> In article <352fnfF4f89pmU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill . >> Gunshannon) writes: >  > <snip> >  >>I >> And it is also a lot different that Unix is on the next box over sincen; >> Unix suffers from such divergence between manufacturers.l >  > I > At least there _are_ multiple manufacturers, so not all the eggs are in 
 > one basket.a >   P Yep!  Score one big one for you on that observation.  Lately our one basket has ? been changing owners faster than Marilyn changed husbands.  :-(-   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:24:56 -0500c( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> Subject: Re: vms versus solaris$= Message-ID: <aKqdnQsAeMkLEnHcRVn-tQ@metrocastcablevision.com>    Dave Froble wrote:   ...   I > So Ok, from within a program on Unix, I implement code that treats the oJ > file as records, calculating the record offset and bytecount and such.  K > Now, how do I take out a lock on the string of bytes I am accessing that  K > will be respected by cooperating programs?  On VMS I can very easily use n
 > the DLM.  H Byte-range locking primitives are fairly standard on Unices these days. G   And they're usable in distributed NFS configurations as well, though eF those are NAS-like in nature rather than SAN-like as VMS clusters are.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:30:39 -0500a- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>s Subject: Re: vms versus solarism, Message-ID: <41EC90D0.4465F28D@teksavvy.com>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:8 > Unix is just as much english as VMS is, just shorter.   C Unix is its own language. And it's had quite an impact on other OS.   H Consider CD. It has propagated to DOS and essentially is standard on VMSN because just about every system manager has a CD :== "SET DEF" in SYLOGIN.COM.  G and a "root account" is understood across platforms  much more than theMG "system account"  would be. So there are a lot of Unix terminology thatu? has essentially become industry standard which allows people ofi/ different OS religion to understand each other.o  C But the more obscure Unix acronyms (that is what Unix commands are, 2 after all) aren't all understood across platforms.   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Jan 2005 00:04:51 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)i Subject: Re: vms versus solariss3 Message-ID: <S8+1lk0Igwib@eisner.encompasserve.org>   W In article <353d9eF4heoajU2@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:t  J > If a stream of bytes can do the job why force everybody to use something= > else to satisfy that one person who might actually need it?v  C There are very few real-world applications best modeled as a stream 	 of bytes.s   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Jan 2005 00:06:47 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)l Subject: Re: vms versus solariss3 Message-ID: <AOmR7iQ+BFGy@eisner.encompasserve.org>s  V In article <41EC8C43.2080309@tsoft-inc.com>, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes: > Tom Linden wrote:i > J >> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:25:53 -0500, Neil Rieck <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>  	 >> wrote:v >> lF >>> On a related note, I remember a discussion with my cousin (a "C"   >>> programmerM >>> at a big insurance company in Canada) a few years back; during a Heineken1M >>> induce debate I stated "C isn't a high level language!" and his reply was-K >>> "It is when you include the libraries!". He was right; the "C" languageaK >>> doesn't have i/o but it does when you include "stdio.h". Over all you  3	 >>> can'trK >>> knock "C" because it always seems to be the first thing ported to a newyK >>> platform. The point of all this drivel is that even the language that    >>> UNIX; >>> is written in was developed with a minimalist approach.  >> 6 >> lN >> There is more to a high-level language than that.  How about strong typing,J >> lexical scoping and inheritance, on conditions, real I/O, just to name 
 >> a  few.I >> How does he do decimal arithmetic (something insurance companies must a
 >> do)  in C?. >> B > P > Simple.  You write or acquire some library routines.  No language/compiler is 0 > perfect.  None of them provide for everything.  < Cobol, PL/1 and Ada all provide built-in decimal arithmetic.: Calling a library to do that from another language is less natural an more prone to error.w   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:55:54 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>e7 Subject: Wall Street Journal article on HP announcement , Message-ID: <41ECA4E8.615F8A68@teksavvy.com>  G Here is what the wall street journal has to say about the announcement.m  B Of note: "controversial Itanium chip", and lack of mention of VMS.E Portrays HP's enterprise business quite differently from the IT presscD articles we've seen so far. The lack of mention of VMS in a businessA paper is an indication that such media don't see VMS as relevant,PH despite the fact that so far, the HP materials have included it for thisH announcement. So it has some way to go with a sustained marketing before) the business journals take VMS seriously.b   > http://www.nyse.com/cgi-bin/ny_news?df=NY&r=S&sym=INTC&sl=ON-01/17-17:09-423|ON-01/17-15:10-390|ON-01/17-11:58-349|BW-01/17-11:02-712|BW-01/17-11:00-695|&sp=0   y Pui-Wing Tam) Staff Reporter of The Wall Street JournalI      F      SAN FRANCISCO -- Hewlett-Packard Co. (HPQ), aiming to beef up itsH      erratic enterprise computing business with new products, said it isG      launching new high- end and mid-range server-computers and related +      software and services early this week.h  K      Amongst the announcements from H-P, Palo Alto, Calif., are new updatedaI      server- computers that use the controversial Itanium chip from Intel5E      Corp. (INTC), and new software that will increase the efficiencys
 and use ofF      these machines. In addition, H-P said it will begin offering moreJ      pay-as-you-go enterprise computing services, for which customers willG      only pay for the amount of computing power that they actually use.o  H      The slew of product announcements comes a month after H-P and IntelI      ended their decade-long chip-development alliance around Itanium. IneB      mid-December, Intel agreed to hire H-P's Itanium design team,K      terminating H-P's involvement in the development process. The move waslK      perceived by some industry experts as a sign that H-P was pulling awayhC      from Itanium and the high-end servers that the chip is used tos	 make. ButtM      H-P said at the time that despite no longer being involved in developingIH      the chip, it was committing $3 billion to invest in Itanium-related(      products over the next three years.  M      Rich Marcello, H-P's senior vice president of business critical servers,iK      said the new products are "the proof in the pudding" of the $3 billion K      commitment. As part of H-P's show of devotion to the Itanium platform,pK      H-P Chief Executive Carly Fiorina and H-P Executive Vice President AnneH      Livermore, who heads enterprise computing and services, will hold a>      Webcast on Tuesday to formally announce the new products.  =      -By Pui-Wing Tam, The Wall Street Journal; 415-765-8238;       pui-wing.tam@wsj.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:18:48 -0500g# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>rQ Subject: [OT]: How copyright could be killing culture - lessons for software too?d, Message-ID: <I86dndSMc8NdpHHcRVn-2w@igs.net>  L http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050117.wxdocs17/BNStory /Entertainment/p  & How copyright could be killing culture  F The high cost of getting permission to use archival footage and photos8 threatens to put makers of documentaries out of business     By GUY DIXON Globe and Mail POSTED AT 8:05 AM EST5 Monday, Jan 17, 2005    H As Americans commemorate Martin Luther King Jr. and his legacy today, noJ television channel will be broadcasting the documentary series Eyes on theE Prize. Produced in the 1980s and widely considered the most importanttA encapsulation of the American civil-rights movement on video, thel? documentary series can no longer be broadcast or sold anywhere.n   Why?  K The makers of the series no longer have permission for the archival footagevJ they previously used of such key events as the historic protest marches orH the confrontations with Southern police. Given Eyes on the Prize's tightJ budget, typical of any documentary, its filmmakers could barely afford theG minimum five-year rights for use of the clips. That permission has longfH since expired, and the $250,000 to $500,000 needed to clear the numerous- copyrights involved is proving too expensive.n  G This is particularly dire now, because VHS copies of the series used intJ countless school curriculums are deteriorating beyond rehabilitation. WithH no new copies allowed to go on sale, "the whole thing, for all practicalL purposes, no longer exists," says Jon Else, a California-based filmmaker whoH helped produce and shoot the series and who also teaches at the Graduate? School of Journalism of the University of California, Berkeley.f  L Securing copyright clearances isn't just a problem for the makers of Eyes onG the Prize. It's a constant, often insurmountable hurdle for documentarynF filmmakers and even for writers wanting to reproduce, say, copyrighted& pictures or song lyrics in their work.  I But it's particularly difficult for any documentary-makers relying on old G news footage, snippets of Hollywood movies or popular music -- the veryoH essence of contemporary culture -- to tell their stories. Each minute ofG copyrighted film can cost thousands of dollars. Each still photo, whichrL might appear in a documentary for mere seconds, can run into the hundreds ofJ dollars. And costs have been rising steeply, as film archives, stock photoI houses and music publishers realize they are sitting on a treasure trove,o Else and other filmmakers say.  H "The owners of the libraries, which are now increasingly under corporateH consolidation, see this as a ready source of income," Else says. "It hasL turned our history into a commodity. They might as well be selling underwear
 or gasoline."s  6 And there's another catch: tighter legal restrictions.  I Copyright legislation has grown stricter in recent years to protect mediai owners from digital piracy.s  J Broadcasters and film distributors, in turn, have become more stringent inK making sure they are legally covered, too. As illustrated in a recent study E by the American University in Washington, which interviewed dozens of J documentary-makers on the myriad problems of getting copyright clearances,I broadcasters and film distributors insist that a documentary have what iseE known as errors and omissions insurance, to protect against copyrightbL infringement. Of course to get it, all copyrights in the documentary have to be cleared anyway.  L It's enough of a legal rigmarole to make underfunded filmmakers simply avoidC using archival clips altogether or to remove footage that they shot I themselves that might include someone singing a popular hit or even Happy_% Birthday to You (a copyrighted song).   K It also means that films like Eyes on the Prize, made in a less restrictiveyD era of copyright rules, can simply fade away if the task of renewing+ copyrights becomes too difficult or costly.e  L "What seems on the face of it a very arcane, bureaucratic piece of copyrightG law, and the arcane part of insurance practice, suddenly results in thevD disappearance of the only video history of the American civil-rightsA movement . . . slowly and without anyone noticing it," says Else.b  J Ironically, the growing popularity of documentary films these days is only making things worse.  E The explosion of digital channels, the DVD market and even the use of K documentary footage on the Internet have created a new level of success for>K documentaries, explains veteran National Film Board producer Gerry Flahive.eB But "suddenly for people who have companies that own stock-footageA collections, the material is more valuable. So it has become more  expensive."   G Before the digital and documentary explosion, a clip of President NixoniJ speaking, for instance, usually could be licensed "in perpetuity," meaningE that the film could continue to use the footage indefinitely. Now thesC incentive is for copyright owners to grant only limited permission.uE "Increasingly, it's harder and harder to get 'in perpetuity,' because-L rights-holders realize that somebody will have to come back in five years or+ 10 years and pay more money," Flahive says.   E Some are calling this the new "clearance culture," in which access toBH copyrights affects the creation of new art as much as, if not more than,H actual artistic and journalistic decisions. It also means that access toE copyrighted footage is only open to those filmmakers with the deepest.( pockets (or many lawyers on their side).  L "You can afford it if the broadcasters pay you a significant amount of moneyD to do the film. If they don't, and they aren't, the issue facing allG documentary filmmakers in Canada . . . is that it is getting harder andoK harder to get a reasonable budget together," Ottawa-based filmmaker MichaelM0 Ostroff says. "It's a serious, serious problem."  ! The American University study (ataH http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/rock/index.htm) is a fascinating, ifF dispiriting, look at the tricks documentary-makers have to pull to getG around copyright restrictions, from turning off all TVs and radios whenaJ filming a subject indoors to replacing a clip of people watching the WorldK Series with a shot of professional basketball on the TV set instead becauseo) that's what the filmmaker had rights for.   I But at a time when documentaries are probing the U.S. war on terrorism or H globalization, for instance, in ways that are more in-depth than typicalI mainstream news media, the question of whether copyright restrictions areU8 creating a blinkered view of the world is a serious one.  J "Why do you think the History Channel is what it is? Why do you think it'sK all World War II documentaries? It's because it's public-domain footage. So J the history we're seeing is being skewed towards what's fallen into publicF domain," says filmmaker Robert Stone in the American University study.  K Flahive at the NFB said that this pushes filmmakers to tell stories in morelF innovative ways. Animation, for example, is becoming a new vehicle for documentary-makers.o  L Else of Eyes on the Prize isn't as giving. "Would you rather see the footageK of the actual attack on the [civil-rights] marchers at the bridge in Selma,lJ Ala., in 1965, or would you rather see a re-enactment of that? There is no1 creative substitute for the real thing," he says.-  J "In a culture that increasingly has trouble separating the real thing fromJ something that's made up, I think that having the real photographic recordK of real events on television screens in our living rooms is priceless. It'siK invaluable. And it's becoming increasingly difficult," he says, adding thatwH he doesn't feel comfortable with the idea that creative decisions should8 have to be based purely on the basis of copyright rules.  H There are ways around the rules, though. The legal defence in the UnitedI States of "fair use" means that footage can be used if the documentary iseI specifically critiquing that footage. So, a documentary-maker could use anB clip of Gene Kelly splashing around in Singing in the Rain, if theK documentary is commenting on Hollywood musicals and that one in particular,eL Else says. A documentary on rain, however, couldn't use the clip. But havingH to use "fair use" as a legal defence means that the documentary-maker isK coming under legal pressure. Many simply can't afford the legal fees to get. out of that kind of situation.  L Documentary-makers typically say they want copyright controls maintained, asA the American University study found. They just want the costs and-F restrictions on copyrighted material to be made more rational. A musicL publisher should allow more concessions for a documentary-maker using a songJ for a film airing on public television, as opposed to someone using a song for a Nike commercial.  K But with the possibility that copyright rules could easily tighten further,oJ there's growing concern about the impact this could have on documentaries,L as it has on Eyes on the Prize. As the award-winning filmmaker Katy ChevignyG says in the American University report: "The only film you can make forpI cheap and not have to worry about rights clearance is about your grandma,  yourself or your dog."   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.035 ************************