0 INFO-VAX	Wed, 25 Jan 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 49      Contents:' Re: Acquiring OpenVMS/VAX Install Media ' Re: Acquiring OpenVMS/VAX Install Media ( Re: Alpha Emulator running on Windows XP) Re: forgetting my DCL: what am I missing? ) Re: forgetting my DCL: what am I missing? ) Re: forgetting my DCL: what am I missing? ) Re: forgetting my DCL: what am I missing? 3 Re: Good OpenVMS presentation (slides # powerpoint)  Himalaya K Series server Himalaya K Series servers : Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry1 ppl$remove_work_item causing excessive CPU usage. ( Re: problems with a new vms installation( Re: problems with a new vms installation( Re: problems with a new vms installation( Re: problems with a new vms installation( Re: problems with a new vms installation( Re: problems with a new vms installation Re: SimH V3.5-2 released Re: SimH V3.5-2 released Tektronix Phaser 560 from VMS?" Re: Tektronix Phaser 560 from VMS?+ Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting + Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting + Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting + Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting + Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting + Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting 3 Re: The processor wars Part 1, "The death of Alpha" 3 Re: The processor wars Part 1, "The death of Alpha" 3 Re: The processor wars Part 1, "The death of Alpha" 3 The processor wars Part 2, "The current generation" * Re: Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page& Re: Why we need itanium notebooks now!  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:11:10 +0000 # From: issinoho <issinoho@gmail.com> 0 Subject: Re: Acquiring OpenVMS/VAX Install Media4 Message-ID: <dr68lu$ifd$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>   Gary Parker wrote: > Hi folks, H > 	I recently discovered the SIMH emulator and fancied reliving my early? > 	University 'frame days by setting up my own VAX environment.  > G > I've signed up with HP on their educational license scheme (as I work K > at Loughborough University) for OpenVMS and have acquired OS licenses for L > VAX and Alpha along with the Layered Product licenses but I'm at a loss asI > to how to now get hold of any install media or images thereof. It seems H > that Montagar sold media kits at one point but their hobbyist web page7 > doesn't seem to have been updated for around 3 years.  > 5 > I understand that as I have an official license for L > all the relevant software now I should be able to make a copy of any mediaL > was told that folk in this forum are usually pretty helpful regarding thatK > sort of thing. I have a ++fast Internet connection here (God Bless JANET) F > so downloading or providing space isn't an issue if someone would be > willing to oblige. > H > Please note that allowing me access to this software is guaranteeing aK > never ending torrent of dumb newbie questions from me to the group once I K > get it installed, it's been a long time since VMS and I saw each other :)  >  > Thanks in advance, > Gary   Check your email   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:22:33 -0500 - From: William Webb <william.w.webb@gmail.com> 0 Subject: Re: Acquiring OpenVMS/VAX Install MediaI Message-ID: <8660a3a10601241522v77e15c83mc6ec125c7f5cc7a8@mail.gmail.com>   0 On 1/24/06, issinoho <issinoho@gmail.com> wrote: > Gary Parker wrote:
 > > Hi folks, L > >       I recently discovered the SIMH emulator and fancied reliving my e= arlyF > >       University 'frame days by setting up my own VAX environment.   [SNIP]   > > J > > Please note that allowing me access to this software is guaranteeing aL > > never ending torrent of dumb newbie questions from me to the group once=  IL > > get it installed, it's been a long time since VMS and I saw each other = :) > >  > > Thanks in advance, > > Gary >  > Check your email >   3 Since you've done it before but forgotten about it, 7 I believe that would make you either a re-newbie or one . who is suffering from newbesia. (A newbesiac?)  1 Anyway, welcome back, and keep your eyes on eBay. / Real hardware shows up there from time to time.   0 And simulators aren't as good as the real thing.  # WWWebb (or I might be a simulation)    --C NOTE: This email address is only used for noncommerical VMS-related  correspondence. C All unsolicited commercial email will be deemed to be a request for 8 services pursuant to the terms and conditions located at# http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/e/webbww/    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:38:22 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha Emulator running on Windows XP 0 Message-ID: <11tcsvv3t94r901@corp.supernews.com>   comp.os.vms@hotmail.com wrote: > Sorry about the double post. > The post should have read: >  > "This is the Charon product?< > The SRI site does not mention availability last I looked " >   % It appears to be a different company.   E More than one company getting into emulating VAX/Alpha.  Wonder what   that should be telling us?   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:46:02 -0800 , From: Ken Fairfield <my.full.name@intel.com>2 Subject: Re: forgetting my DCL: what am I missing?+ Message-ID: <dr6anb$79o$1@news01.intel.com>   
 AEF wrote: > Ken Fairfield wrote:
 >> AEF wrote:  >> >> [very BIG snip] >>E >>> BTW: One can also ask why your application can't handle the extra < >>> space! Especially since the /11 starts with a slash. :-) >>> I >>>>>      And of course, as others have noted, the reason PRIVREQUEST is G >>>>> giving you this problem is because it is *not* using DCL to parse G >>>>> the command line.  Otherwise, a space before a qualifier wouldn't G >>>>> matter.  One of my pet peeves is "imitation" DCL command lines... 0 >>> So why doesn't the program ignore the space?> >>      Because the person who wrote the program (not Phillip)? >> wrote their own command line parser which, for this program, < >> requires the "/11" to be "attached" to the 3rd parameter. > F > So why does DCL put in that "extra space"? Because the person(s) who+ > wrote that part of DCL wrote it that way.    Of course.  Your point?   	      -Ken  --6 I don't speak for Intel, Intel doesn't speak for me...  
 Ken Fairfield ! D1C Automation VMS System Support " who:   kenneth dot h dot fairfield where: intel dot com   ------------------------------   Date: 25 Jan 2006 00:16:29 GMT. From: JONESD@ecr6.ohio-state.edu (David Jones)2 Subject: Re: forgetting my DCL: what am I missing?: Message-ID: <dr6g0t$6fb$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>  L In message <dr3bdr$2mu$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de writes:  : >In article <dr37kt$nt1$1@news01.intel.com>, Ken Fairfield! ><my.full.name@intel.com> writes: B >> I admit to not knowing what "feature" or rule of DCL manages toD >> accomplish this feat, but I do know I have used it more than once >> in the past.  > G >Apparently, this trick will not only get rid of the implied space (why H >is that there in the first place) but also get rid of real space in the >command line.  J I dug into some VMS source listings to try to get some illumination on theO behaviour but didn't really get any.  The 'first token is symbol' processing in K command.mar always skips all whitespace following the token and ensures the I token expansion ends in a space unless supressed by using havine the last K character be a single quote.  The comments indicates the "'" trick is fully / intentional but no deeper explanation is given.   C >Yes.  I prefer a real CLD (which doesn't have to mess with the DCL H >tables; one can compile it into the foreign command).  In this case, myF >suspicion is that, since the server was written with VMS in mind (andE >originally for VMS), a VMS "look and feel" was desired but, since it I >apparently also runs on Digital Unix (wasn't there also DECnet available E >for Digital Unix (the server can run without it but runs better with / >it)), code was needed which would run on both.    The real reason is: K    1) privrequest is a simple program to act as a conduit to the management N       interface of the web server.  It takes string in argv[2] as construed byM       the C RTL and sends it to the server, there is no sense of command line        qualifiers.   N    2) The management module on the server has a simple command set (initally 6G       commands, now 8) for functions that are secondary to the server's X       principal function (processing HTTP requests).  Pulling in the DCL PARSE machineryM       was more work than I wanted to do.  The "/argument" syntax came as much 8       from VAX console commands (e.g. ">>> B/1") as DCL.    < David L. Jones               |      Phone:    (614) 271-6718- Ohio State University        |      Internet: L 140 W. 19th St.              |               jonesd@er6s1.eng.ohio-state.edu: Columbus, OH 43210           |               vman+@osu.edu  1 Disclaimer: I'm looking for marbles all day long.    ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 21:04:41 -0800$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com>2 Subject: Re: forgetting my DCL: what am I missing?C Message-ID: <1138165481.733574.262590@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Ken Fairfield wrote: > AEF wrote: > > Ken Fairfield wrote: > >> AEF wrote:  > >> > >> [very BIG snip] > >>G > >>> BTW: One can also ask why your application can't handle the extra > > >>> space! Especially since the /11 starts with a slash. :-) > >>> K > >>>>>      And of course, as others have noted, the reason PRIVREQUEST is I > >>>>> giving you this problem is because it is *not* using DCL to parse I > >>>>> the command line.  Otherwise, a space before a qualifier wouldn't I > >>>>> matter.  One of my pet peeves is "imitation" DCL command lines... 2 > >>> So why doesn't the program ignore the space?@ > >>      Because the person who wrote the program (not Phillip)A > >> wrote their own command line parser which, for this program, > > >> requires the "/11" to be "attached" to the 3rd parameter. > > H > > So why does DCL put in that "extra space"? Because the person(s) who- > > wrote that part of DCL wrote it that way.  >  > Of course.  Your point?   D That *is* my point. "Because it was written that way" answers *both*
 questions.   >  >      -Ken  > --8 > I don't speak for Intel, Intel doesn't speak for me... >  > Ken Fairfield # > D1C Automation VMS System Support $ > who:   kenneth dot h dot fairfield > where: intel dot com   ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 21:47:38 -0800$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com>2 Subject: Re: forgetting my DCL: what am I missing?C Message-ID: <1138168058.532141.185460@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   
 AEF wrote: > Ken Fairfield wrote: > > AEF wrote: > > > Ken Fairfield wrote: > > >> AEF wrote:  > > >> > > >> [very BIG snip] > > >>I > > >>> BTW: One can also ask why your application can't handle the extra @ > > >>> space! Especially since the /11 starts with a slash. :-) > > >>> M > > >>>>>      And of course, as others have noted, the reason PRIVREQUEST is K > > >>>>> giving you this problem is because it is *not* using DCL to parse K > > >>>>> the command line.  Otherwise, a space before a qualifier wouldn't K > > >>>>> matter.  One of my pet peeves is "imitation" DCL command lines... 4 > > >>> So why doesn't the program ignore the space?B > > >>      Because the person who wrote the program (not Phillip)C > > >> wrote their own command line parser which, for this program, @ > > >> requires the "/11" to be "attached" to the 3rd parameter. > > > J > > > So why does DCL put in that "extra space"? Because the person(s) who/ > > > wrote that part of DCL wrote it that way.  > >  > > Of course.  Your point?  > F > That *is* my point. "Because it was written that way" answers *both* > questions.  D IOW, why is the same answer satisfactory for the privrequest program  but not for DCL command parsing?   >  > > 
 > >      -Ken  > > --: > > I don't speak for Intel, Intel doesn't speak for me... > >  > > Ken Fairfield % > > D1C Automation VMS System Support & > > who:   kenneth dot h dot fairfield > > where: intel dot com   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:34:12 -0500 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> < Subject: Re: Good OpenVMS presentation (slides # powerpoint)9 Message-ID: <msBBf.8827$ft2.147638@news20.bellglobal.com>   6 "Syltrem" <syltremzulu@videotron.ca> wrote in message * news:11t2gtbb8r5bufd@corp.supernews.com...3 > Thought this could be interesting to some of you. ( > Especially if you have a sale to make. > J > Click this link to download PowerPoint ShowOpenVMS Today - Going beyond 2 > technology (before Feb 19 2006 when it expires) L > https://www.avitage.com/proc/hp/p/4vvszz0fs3wrf5vjz52s/OpenvmsTodayGoi.ppt >  > Have a nice weekend, everyone  > 	 > Syltrem  > J Slide #37 mentions DDR-II and PCI-E for Itanium. Does anyone know if this L technology was ever sold with Alpha? (I've had both of them for a while now  on my ASUS P5GD2)   
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.8 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html   ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 10:58:58 -0800' From: "Sube33162" <sube33162@yahoo.com> ! Subject: Himalaya K Series server C Message-ID: <1138129138.220199.257890@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   D I have recently acquired four of the above servers and would like toF resell them (cheap).  Can anyone give me some ideas of how to go about( this?  Does anyone know a reseller, etc?   ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 11:01:16 -0800' From: "Sube33162" <sube33162@yahoo.com> " Subject: Himalaya K Series serversC Message-ID: <1138129276.593449.320170@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   D I have recently acquired four of the above servers and would like toD resell them.  Can anyone give me some ideas of how to go about this?! Does anyone know a reseller, etc?    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:23:49 GMT ( From: Jim Akerlind <jakerlind@mn.rr.com>C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 8 Message-ID: <ikvct15utmtoeq17mnk1sa3hsnhrh4vjhi@4ax.com>   Windows on Alpha? Since when?           9 On 23 Jan 2006 19:24:41 -0800, bob@instantwhip.com wrote:   H >when will they forget itanium and use alpha ... it runs vms and windoze >andH >linux already and has EV79 and EV8 already laid out ready to go ... now >they F >are using a cheap alpha clone in AMD when they could be producing and> >using the top chip in the industry ... genius strategy HP ...   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:31:09 -0600 % From: Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 5 Message-ID: <slrndtd03t.h0l.usenet@zappy.catbert.org>   b In article <ikvct15utmtoeq17mnk1sa3hsnhrh4vjhi@4ax.com>, Jim Akerlind <jakerlind@mn.rr.com> wrote: > Windows on Alpha? Since when?    Windows NT 3.1, July, 1993.   ' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT   G Support was dropped long ago, though. NT 4.0 was the last of Windows to  run on the Alpha.   H (4.0 was released in July, 1996 and 2000 came along in, well, 2000. :) )   -Dan   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:58:37 -0500 - From: William Webb <william.w.webb@gmail.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry I Message-ID: <8660a3a10601241258l7c5c8924x1a5d7d7484740c32@mail.gmail.com>   2 On 1/24/06, Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> wrote:L > In article <ikvct15utmtoeq17mnk1sa3hsnhrh4vjhi@4ax.com>, Jim Akerlind <ja= kerlind@mn.rr.com> wrote: ! > > Windows on Alpha? Since when?  >  > Windows NT 3.1, July, 1993.  > ) > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT  > I > Support was dropped long ago, though. NT 4.0 was the last of Windows to  > run on the Alpha.  > J > (4.0 was released in July, 1996 and 2000 came along in, well, 2000. :) ) >  > -Dan >   L Did it?  I thought it was late, like much else that MS does. (I looked- 2/2= 000).    BTW- love your bogus address.    WWWebb --C NOTE: This email address is only used for noncommerical VMS-related  correspondence. C All unsolicited commercial email will be deemed to be a request for 8 services pursuant to the terms and conditions located at# http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/e/webbww/    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:46:00 -0500 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry G Message-ID: <V9OdnWgY7IaVD0venZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@metrocastcablevision.com>    Dan Foster wrote:  >    ...   #   NT 4.0 was the last of Windows to  > run on the Alpha.   I Well, to be picky Win2K was the last of Windows to run on Alpha:  it was  & just never released (thanks to Curly).   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:00:41 -0600 % From: Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 5 Message-ID: <slrndtd5bp.h0l.usenet@zappy.catbert.org>   q In article <V9OdnWgY7IaVD0venZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@metrocastcablevision.com>, Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:  > Dan Foster wrote:  > % >   NT 4.0 was the last of Windows to  >> run on the Alpha. > K > Well, to be picky Win2K was the last of Windows to run on Alpha:  it was  ( > just never released (thanks to Curly).  " Ahh, you're right. Duly corrected.  D And if I'd had read a little further down on the page, I'd have seenC that mention, too. It states that support ended in 1999 when Compaq H discontinued funding of that port shortly before Windows 2000's release, as you point out.    -Dan   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:56:37 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 0 Message-ID: <11tdj4pikso6if8@corp.supernews.com>   Bill Todd wrote: > Dan Foster wrote:  >  >> >  > ...  > $ >  NT 4.0 was the last of Windows to >  >> run on the Alpha. >  > K > Well, to be picky Win2K was the last of Windows to run on Alpha:  it was  ( > just never released (thanks to Curly). >  > - bill  ' I have a CD.  There was a beta release.    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:15:46 -0500 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry G Message-ID: <Ft2dnXwsE87OQkvenZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@metrocastcablevision.com>    Dave Froble wrote: > Bill Todd wrote: >> Dan Foster wrote: >> >>>  >> >> ... >>% >>  NT 4.0 was the last of Windows to  >> >>> run on the Alpha.  >> >>H >> Well, to be picky Win2K was the last of Windows to run on Alpha:  it - >> was just never released (thanks to Curly).  >>	 >> - bill  > ) > I have a CD.  There was a beta release.   E Poor wording on my part:  I meant final release to manufacturing.  I  F think there were 64-bit Windows field-test kits too for Alpha (though D possibly alphas rather than betas - unless both 32- and 64-bit were  combined on the same kit).   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:01:48 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry + Message-ID: <43D6F82C.BACB58B1@comcast.net>    bob@instantwhip.com wrote: > I > when will they forget itanium and use alpha ... it runs vms and windoze  > and I > linux already and has EV79 and EV8 already laid out ready to go ... now  > theyG > are using a cheap alpha clone in AMD when they could be producing and ? > using the top chip in the industry ... genius strategy HP ...   C I understand your frustration, Bob, but it looks like you're really ' "reaching" for something to carp about.   E While plenty of companies - including SUN, BTW - are avoiding the I64 B bandwagon in droves, that hardly turns people who make ill-advised choices a "laughing stock".   F Gotta be honest here: many of us lambast HP to some degree for our own; reasons, and deservedly so, it would seem, at least to us.    G It may be in your best interest - and VMS's - to tone down the rhetoric  a bit.  
 Whaddaya say?    --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  & Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page! http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/   ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/   ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:33:32 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry , Message-ID: <43D6FF71.568E27F9@teksavvy.com>   David J Dachtera wrote: H > Gotta be honest here: many of us lambast HP to some degree for our own< > reasons, and deservedly so, it would seem, at least to us. > I > It may be in your best interest - and VMS's - to tone down the rhetoric  > a bit.   <carbon fibre hat on>   F HP has not made any attempts to kill rumours of IA64's demise. Instead6 they keep on sending signals that support that theory.  D Consider their latest strategy meeting where they leaked out that HPH would consider moving out of mainframes and concentrate on blade systems for enterprise systems.   F Consider that when they announced blade IA64 things, they made sure toC state that they were plug compatible with real 8086 blades and that E people could mix/match and replace an IA64 blade with 8086 components 	 later on.     F Consider that HP has had to pay some 3 billion bucks to Intel for thatG IA64 thing, and that is on top of the per chip costs HP must pay Intel. H Consider the low volumes for that IA64 thing. It really doesn't pan out.6 (And Alpha costed only a few hundre million per year).  F For 3 billion bucks, they could port VMS and Tandem to the 64 bit 80863 (and possibly HP-UX is they want to) and then some.   D Sun has made its plans more or less obvious. Continue with SPARC forF now, and grow the 8086 server range and when/if it matches SPARC, thenA there is no point in continuing SPARC. The future availability of 3 platforms that can run Solaris is not in question.    E It will/could be the same with HP. The only difference is that HP has F not announced ports of VMS NSK or HP-UX to the 8086 (yet). So, for VMS@ and NSK, the future availability of a platform to run them is inF question. So it is not only the fact that VMS is restricted to a smallF niche market, but also that the long term viability of that IA64 thing is still in question.   E The second the 8086 scales to teh same performance/system features as B that IA64 thing, IA64 is toast. And that moment is probably coming sooner rather than later.   % Tone down the rethoric ? you say ????   @ At this point in time, HP has not made any firm, public, writtenG commitments to make VMS survive beyond IA64. What if the statement that F HP was moving out of mainframes implies letting VMS die along with the? mainframes ? Are you going to just keep your mount shut and not ) proactively prevent that from happening ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 01:12:18 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 0 Message-ID: <11te5kqmefo9452@corp.supernews.com>   David J Dachtera wrote:  > bob@instantwhip.com wrote: > I >>when will they forget itanium and use alpha ... it runs vms and windoze  >>and I >>linux already and has EV79 and EV8 already laid out ready to go ... now  >>theyG >>are using a cheap alpha clone in AMD when they could be producing and ? >>using the top chip in the industry ... genius strategy HP ...  >  > E > I understand your frustration, Bob, but it looks like you're really ) > "reaching" for something to carp about.  > G > While plenty of companies - including SUN, BTW - are avoiding the I64 D > bandwagon in droves, that hardly turns people who make ill-advised > choices a "laughing stock".  > H > Gotta be honest here: many of us lambast HP to some degree for our own= > reasons, and deservedly so, it would seem, at least to us.   > I > It may be in your best interest - and VMS's - to tone down the rhetoric  > a bit. >  > Whaddaya say?  >   = I'm thinking that more people need to show their frustration.   G Either the half dozen or so of us crackpots are just that, or, many of  H us can see what would be better and cannot understand how DEC/Compaq/HP  could be so blind and stupid.   H Quite recently someone mentioned that curly and carly weren't technical H people, and were not listening to their technical people.  I'm thinking $ that is a large part of the problem.  I As for boob, it would be better if he thought just a bit before posting,  E found some capitol letters, and didn't snip everything to which he's  ' replying.  But turn down the heat, nix.    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 13:41:21 -0800- From: "Matt" <matthew_tyler@blueyonder.co.uk> : Subject: ppl$remove_work_item causing excessive CPU usage.C Message-ID: <1138138881.367600.193010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>    Hi,   E I am experiencing a performance issue which seems to be caused by the G ppl library (which I realise is no longer supported but I am stuck with  it for the short term)  F I am working with a legacy application that consists of five processes  that read/write from ppl queues.  C One process does a blocking read on a shared PPL queue. When a work ? item (message) arrives it is removed from the queue, some minor A processing and some minor processing is performed. This procedure  completes ad naseum.  A On a single processor ES45 running open VMS v7.2 this one process G consumes around 25% of CPU time at an input message rate of 25 messages 3 per second which I believe to be unecessarily high.   D  I stubbed out all of the code in the process apart from the call toF ppl$remove_work_item and the CPU usage remained the same leading me toA believe that the call to ppl$remove_work_item is the cause of the F problem (The call is made without the non_blocking or spin flags being set).   C Has anyone else experienced this sort of problem using PPL or would ? have any idea of any system parameters that may need adjusting?    Regards    Matt   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:35:40 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 1 Subject: Re: problems with a new vms installation , Message-ID: <43D67373.44F67738@teksavvy.com>  
 micken wrote: ' > running decw$startup did the trick :)   E Note that if you want decwidnows to support TCPIP, you need to ensure A that it starts AFTER TCPIP. You can use F$GETDVI to check for the B existence of the BG: device before allowing decw$startup to start.  H In systartup_VMS.com, you can look to wait for BG to appear, and once itG is there, you can then contine and let systartup_VMS end. (decw$startup H is automatically invoked after systartup_VMS based on the WINDOW_SYSTEM  SYSGEN parameter.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:36:36 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 1 Subject: Re: problems with a new vms installation 0 Message-ID: <11tcssmj3n3ev99@corp.supernews.com>  
 micken wrote:  > Thanks for all help. > ' > running decw$startup did the trick :)  >   F Check SYSTARTUP_VMS.COM to see if the DECwindows startup is inhibited.   $  $! Suppress DecWindows $ ! $! define DECW$IGNORE_DECNET TRUE % $! define DECW$IGNORE_DECWINDOWS TRUE   G I've got the above commands commented out.  If you have something like  9 that, and it's executing, then DECwindows will not start.    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:11:33 GMT  From: <micken@micken.mine.nu> 1 Subject: Re: problems with a new vms installation 3 Message-ID: <VRvBf.43216$d5.199350@newsb.telia.net>   ( Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote: > micken wrote:  >> Thanks for all help.  >>  ( >> running decw$startup did the trick :) >>   >  However I can't start XDM.   ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 22:00:49 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)1 Subject: Re: problems with a new vms installation , Message-ID: <43d6a391$1@news.langstoeger.at>  S In article <VRvBf.43216$d5.199350@newsb.telia.net>, <micken@micken.mine.nu> writes:  >However I can't start XDM.   > 1) Did you configure (create the dir, enable the service) it ?) 	This is done by running TCPIP$CONFIG.COM @ 2) Did you create the config files in SYS$SPECIFIC:[TCPIP$XDM] ?8 	This is done by copying (& editing) the four *.TEMPLATE' 	files to .TXT and/or .CONF accordingly G 3) What does the log (SYS$SPECIFIC:[TCPIP$XDM]TCPIP$XDM_RUN.LOG) tell ?    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 22:59:51 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)1 Subject: Re: problems with a new vms installation , Message-ID: <43d6b167$1@news.langstoeger.at>  U In article <81xBf.154567$dP1.513061@newsc.telia.net>, <micken@micken.mine.nu> writes: 8 >Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER <peter@langstoeger.at> wrote:V >> In article <VRvBf.43216$d5.199350@newsb.telia.net>, <micken@micken.mine.nu> writes: >>>However I can't start XDM.  >>  A >> 1) Did you configure (create the dir, enable the service) it ? 2 >>        This is done by running TCPIP$CONFIG.COM > . >When I choose XDM in TCPIP$CONFIG I get this:8 >Invalid configuration option selected, please try again  = Which selection ? Does it tell "XDM" and "...no license..." ? E Do you have the correct PAK (UCX, NET-APP-SUP-300, NET-APP-SUP-400) ? J The client license (UCX-CLIENT, NET-APP-SUP-150) is not sufficient for XDM' (and other server services/features)...    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:01:07 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 1 Subject: Re: problems with a new vms installation , Message-ID: <43D6B19B.FC466063@teksavvy.com>   micken@micken.mine.nu wrote: > However I can't start XDM.  * Have you configured it with TCPIP$CONFIG ?  . Which version of TCPIP Services do you have ?    if you do:   4 $ TCPIP SHOW SERVICES  whats does it say about XDM ?  H Note that the XDM server supplied with VMS lacks some of the more commonU authentication method and is therefore useless in many instances. (Lacks MIT-COOKIES)    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:41:38 -0600 / From: Chris Scheers <chris@applied-synergy.com> ! Subject: Re: SimH V3.5-2 released 2 Message-ID: <43D6AD22.5060302@applied-synergy.com>   vaxorcist wrote:< > Anyone who wants to try one of the following VMS versions:* > - 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 > - 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, > I'll be glad to supply those listed above. >  > I'm still looking for: > - 1.x  > - 2.x 0 > - 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.7A (with LAVC support) > Can anyone help?   FWIW:    LAVC support was added in 4.5B.   . IIRC, 4.7A added MicroVAX III (KA650) support.   --  G ----------------------------------------------------------------------- $ Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.  B Voice: 817-237-3360            Internet: chris@applied-synergy.com    Fax: 817-237-3074   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:50:53 -0700  From: Kevin Handy <kth@srv.net> ! Subject: Re: SimH V3.5-2 released 3 Message-ID: <1138142562_14953@sp6iad.superfeed.net>    vaxorcist wrote:	 > HELP!!!  > G > Does anyone know the standard BACKUP SAVE-SET record length under VMS = > V3??? Must have changed lateron as 32256 does not work :-((  > 	 > Regards  >  > Ulli > ; If you have a running V3, you could create a dummy save set  and dir/full that.  = If not, you might try one of the unix vmsbackup programs, and  see if it will tell you.  Q ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- S http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups K ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----    ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 19:06:43 -0800, From: "rcyoung" <rcyoung@aliconsultants.com>' Subject: Tektronix Phaser 560 from VMS? C Message-ID: <1138158403.081689.214420@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   @ Does anyone have information on how (or if ) a Phaser 560 can beE accessed from VMS? The Phaser has LPR capabilities (I can print to it C using LPR from a Unix system), and I am only printing plain 'black' G text. I have been trying to set it up using TCP/IP Services and seem to G get nada. Any examples floating around of how to set it up??? I feel it 9 is a matter of not having some basic pice of information. = A have an HP4000 working just fine using the telnet symbiont.    I do not have DCPS.    ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 22:03:53 -0800, From: "Cluster-Karl" <karl.rohwedder@gmx.de>+ Subject: Re: Tektronix Phaser 560 from VMS? C Message-ID: <1138169033.195988.150420@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   F Perhaps you should give DCPS a try, its free and supports at least the
 Phaser models D Phaser 200e, Phaser 200i, Phaser 220e, Phaser 740, Phaser 750,Phaser 780, Phaser 850   
 regards Kalle    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:57:30 GMT % From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> 4 Subject: Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting2 Message-ID: <KEvBf.2044$3Q4.1045@news.cpqcorp.net>  ' Rich Jordan <jordan@ccs4vms.com> wrote:  > Rick,   D >      periods where echo lags up to 12 seconds (worst case) and 3-6D > seconds (afternoon average) behind typing, with very bursty echoesD > (user types several words, gets one char echo, then next char echoF > then a burst of almost all the typed characters, then another singleE > echo...  etc).  Usually this corresponds with (when testing) 4 - 5% A > packet losses, regardless of the size of the ping packets being ? > used.  Ping testing does not have any apparent effect on user D > response, so I don't think the bandwidth is being crowded so close > that the pings matter. > ... E >      Can't do the TCP nodelay at both ends.  There is only one host B > (alpha) at the central location; the two remotes have DECserversD > with DNAS and terminals only.  I don't see any command line option< > for getting that level of control of TCPIP settings on the@ > DECservers so far but I haven't managed to actually do all the; > research yet (darn phones would not stop today... grr...)   D That's OK.  Pauses of more than a fraction of a second aren't likelyB TCP_NODELAY anyway.  They are likely as not packet losses - and ifD they are more than half a second or a second, they could be multipleC losses of the segment - the original and the retransmits.  And when E the average los rate is 5% there could indeed be multiple loss events  in that.  F Packet traces at the Alpha end may still be interesting - it would not? show when keystrokes from the clients are lost multiple times - > although if its netstat stats show out-of-order segments being@ received it might, but it would certainly show if it had its own multiple retransmission events.   = Also, IIRC (I'm a little fuzzy on this one) the first segment E transmitted after a retransmitted one is ACKed goes-out with the then D backed-off Retransmission TimeOut (RTO) and if that segment is lost,C it will have a rather long timeout.  Again, I'm a bit fuzzy on that  one...  B >      The ISP hasn't been helpful so far.  This is a circuit with@ > PPPoE underpinnings because nothing else is available at theseF > locations short of a T1 that is beyond the budget for this customer.C > It may be worth banging on them again though; we'll see tomorrow.   F I think someone else in the thread suggested checking for link up/down? events with the PPPoE stuff and that would be good.  That could ? certainly trigger multiple retransmissions of the same segment.   
 rick jones --  . a wide gulf separates "what if" from "if only"F these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)D feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...   ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 13:38:42 -0800( From: "Rich Jordan" <jordan@ccs4vms.com>4 Subject: Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshootingC Message-ID: <1138138722.450330.251970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>    JF, F      so far no bottleneck has shown up in traceroutes, but again I canC only run them (usefully) from the central site.  The DSL router and D DECserver don't provide statistics, only the addresses for pings andF traceroutes (but I'm getting signed on to one of the remote DSL modems0 again to recheck rather than trusting the docs).  E      We're currently using large packets mostly to exercise the line; C using default size packets (64 bytes I believe) generally shows the D same level of packet loss though.  We also tested large to make sureD that the PPPoE underpinnings weren't causing large packet loss; that8 was the reason for reducing the firewall MTUs from 1500.  C      Interestingly (sadly) the DNAS documentation doesn't have much E useful in it beyond setting a keepalive timer, and number of retries. D The online help, however, lists options for TCP delay ack and serialF delay; the explanation of the latter is a bit sparse, but I'm going toC take a stab at changing those too, with users standing by to check. E Given Rick Jone's excellent explanations above I doubt it will make a B difference, but its worth a shot.  FWIW, the servers came with the following settings:   %  TCP Keepalive timer:        Disabled   TCP Keepalive Retry:        8#  TCP Delayed Acks:          Enabled &  TCP Serial Delay:             Enabled   Rich CCS    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:09:28 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 4 Subject: Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting, Message-ID: <43D6B390.3CFDAF43@teksavvy.com>   Rich Jordan wrote:H >      so far no bottleneck has shown up in traceroutes, but again I can2 > only run them (usefully) from the central site.   H Doesn't generally matter. A traceroute measures the time for a packet toC make it TO a router and then BACK to you. So a bottleneck in either  direction will show up.      > The DSL router and% > DECserver don't provide statistics,   D Try to get the DSL Router's full manuals. If there is a command lineF interface, you may be able to get statistics out of the beast. What isF important is to look at the length of time since the DSL link was lastM established, AND amount of time since the last PPPoE session was established.   F Also, check to see if that router supports SYSLOG or SNMP so you could capture events onto a computer.   F > same level of packet loss though.  We also tested large to make sureF > that the PPPoE underpinnings weren't causing large packet loss; that: > was the reason for reducing the firewall MTUs from 1500.  H Because of the pesky PPPoE, you cannot use 1500. 1492 is the theoreticalE limit because PPPoE uses 8 bytes of additional headers. However, some C ISPs reduce the MTU even more to increase efficiency of ATM packets ! (which are multiple of 64 bytes).   . But for Telnet, you wouldn't see a difference.  G Once issue to look into which si quite obscure is to try to find out if G the box doing the PPPoE thing pads all packets to the MTU. Some low end H routers were designed to do that. So for every character you would send,F the router would send 1500 bytes over the DSL line. This would greatlyD reduce your throughput. If your have a good ISP, they may be able to< trace some of your packets to see if they are padded or not.   ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 15:40:37 -0800( From: "Rich Jordan" <jordan@ccs4vms.com>4 Subject: Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshootingC Message-ID: <1138146037.143599.290730@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Netopia 3346 V8.5r1   > Turns out it does have a CLI, but the ISP had not provided theG authentication info.  I have that now for all three sites, and it looks  like it may be helpful.   F Ping testing and traceroute both return statistics and timing.  So farG some initial tests from the central modem to the LAN side of the remote D modems is showing 3-4% packet loss to one location, 0% to the other,D with equivalent times (50-60ms for 64 byte packets, 70-120ms for 372D byte packets, no time to test larger).  Both sites were experiencing6 significant latency before, during, and after testing.  F The central modem's log showed a series of disconnect/reconnect at theF PPPoE level on 1/23 after 9:15PM, after 10:06PM, and after 11:13PM, onC 1/19 after 11:05PM and after 11:34PM, and on 1/17 after 11:09PM and G after 11:16PM.   There are no log entries at all for daytime operations G (when the problems are occurring) and all of the event groups covered 7 D to 30 minutes.  It does look like the problems happen in bursts when they happen.  < The VPN tunnels are set to remain on all the time; they haveD keepalives, and will renegotiate every 8 hours, so there is constant@ data flow.  The service was purchased as 'always on, static IP'.  B I'll do bidirectional testing tomorrow.  I'll also try to find outD about any MTU padding on the modems.  I can't find any way to changeE that on the DECservers, and I haven't touched it on the Alpha either;  just on the firewalls.   Rich   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:27:50 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 4 Subject: Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting0 Message-ID: <11tdkveqlb5j67b@corp.supernews.com>   Rich Jordan wrote: > Netopia 3346 V8.5r1  > @ > Turns out it does have a CLI, but the ISP had not provided theI > authentication info.  I have that now for all three sites, and it looks  > like it may be helpful.  > H > Ping testing and traceroute both return statistics and timing.  So farI > some initial tests from the central modem to the LAN side of the remote F > modems is showing 3-4% packet loss to one location, 0% to the other,F > with equivalent times (50-60ms for 64 byte packets, 70-120ms for 372F > byte packets, no time to test larger).  Both sites were experiencing8 > significant latency before, during, and after testing. > H > The central modem's log showed a series of disconnect/reconnect at theH > PPPoE level on 1/23 after 9:15PM, after 10:06PM, and after 11:13PM, onE > 1/19 after 11:05PM and after 11:34PM, and on 1/17 after 11:09PM and I > after 11:16PM.   There are no log entries at all for daytime operations I > (when the problems are occurring) and all of the event groups covered 7 F > to 30 minutes.  It does look like the problems happen in bursts when > they happen. > > > The VPN tunnels are set to remain on all the time; they haveF > keepalives, and will renegotiate every 8 hours, so there is constantB > data flow.  The service was purchased as 'always on, static IP'. > D > I'll do bidirectional testing tomorrow.  I'll also try to find outF > about any MTU padding on the modems.  I can't find any way to changeG > that on the DECservers, and I haven't touched it on the Alpha either;  > just on the firewalls. >  > Rich >   % This thread is getting personal.  :-)   I Not the same situation, but maybe something to look at.  What really got   my attention was 'Netopia'.   C First, I have only dial-up access.  Some of us are meant to suffer.   C Last summer my Netopia R9100 router stopped working, right after a  D thunderstorm, and some switches also developed problems at the same I time.  Netopia told me the router could not be repaired, apparently they  E do not repair their equipment.  They sold me a 4686XL to replace the  A R9100.  The damn thing never worked properly.  For some types of  6 activity there appeared to be significant packet loss.  C I couldn't spend time on the thing, so I used a MultiTech RF550VPN  I router, my backup device, which worked Ok.  When time permitted, I would  ? hook up the Netopia and try their support staff's latest ideas.   I Was working on it again today.  Using a rather crude test, I was pinging  H over a VPN with different packet sizes.  700 was about the best I could * do before significant packet loss occured.  F The thing is, when I use the backup router, things are fine.  I don't H have the time or resources for detailed testing, so I cannot really say H what the problems are.  Netopia support is also baffled, and is looking E for a spare R9100 to test with.  Bottom line, the Netopia router has  E problems, and with everything else the same, another router does not  A have problems.  That's as percise as I can get, which isn't much.   3 Can you try a different router at one or both ends?    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:49:11 GMT % From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> 4 Subject: Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting1 Message-ID: <HGBBf.2066$EU4.202@news.cpqcorp.net>   . JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote: > Rich Jordan wrote:@ >> modems is showing 3-4% packet loss to one location, 0% to theF >> other, with equivalent times (50-60ms for 64 byte packets, 70-120msB >> for 372 byte packets, no time to test larger).  Both sites wereF >> experiencing significant latency before, during, and after testing.  D > Have you tried pinging with ever increasing packet sizes ? You canC > use that to determine the effective MTU between two points. (once F > your exceed MTU, pings have 100% packet loss).  And also, I find oddD > that your ping times would increase so significantly by going from > 64 to 372 byte packets.   F Maybe there is something different about VMS ping, but everywhere elseB I've used ping, the ICMP Echo Requests it sent could be fragmentedC once they got larger than the MTU along the way.  Does VMS ping set ) the DF bit in the IP header or something?   
 rick jones --  ? Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought.  F these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)D feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...   ------------------------------    Date: 24 Jan 2006 13:01:38 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) < Subject: Re: The processor wars Part 1, "The death of Alpha"3 Message-ID: <SP5qlSLQtoYI@eisner.encompasserve.org>   Y In article <03vBf.2036$MO4.55@news.cpqcorp.net>, John Reagan <john.reagan@hp.com> writes:   C > Not to defend or deny what you heard (I heard many of those same  K > presentations as well), what do people think of Apple switching to Intel  I > chips.  For years, Apple and Steve Jobs have said many negative things  J > about Intel chips in favor of PowerPC.  Now that they've switched, were  > they lying in the past?   D IBM and Motorola were unable to produce successively faster portable (low power) processors.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:05:21 -0500 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>< Subject: Re: The processor wars Part 1, "The death of Alpha"= Message-ID: <1eGdnQHshLM_OUveRVn-vg@metrocastcablevision.com>    John Reagan wrote:   ...   2   what do people think of Apple switching to Intel > chips.  G All in all, probably a reasonable move, as long as transition pain for  @ users can be kept acceptably low (kind of a big 'if' there, but I reportedly they did a decent job with the previous such transition).  As  D Larry observed, laptop PPC variants were a problem without any good  solution in sight.  A    For years, Apple and Steve Jobs have said many negative things ( > about Intel chips in favor of PowerPC.  I Yes, they did:  some were exaggerations (for at least some workloads x86  B has been superior to PPC for a long time), some were correct (one H notable area in which the PPC variant they used was superior was in its C 'Altivec' extensions, though precisely how important those were to  C typical Mac users I don't know).  PPC probably seemed a lot better  I choice back when Apple made it than it seems today:  x86 has advanced at  I a rate which virtually no one expected back then (those low expectations  3 are one major reason why Itanic exists, after all).   "    Now that they've switched, were > they lying in the past?   I You seem to be confusing marketing hype with outright prevarication.  As  C a fellow engineer I can sympathize, but in this case (as explained  % below) there are *major* differences.   2 >  Is this similar to the Alpha vs Itanium switch?  
 No way, Jose.   H Hyping your own offerings by being selective (even *very* selective) in I what you emphasize is at worst misleading, and certainly has been pretty  F standard procedure for my lifetime (my earliest memories of marketing I hype date back to "The Hidden Persuaders" IIRC back in the '50s, but the  = history of such activity probably stretches back millennial).   G By contrast, Compaq actively lied, persistently and pervasively, about  3 the Alphacide.  Let us count just some of the ways:   D 1.  Compaq kept telling its customers that it was safe to bet their G businesses on Alpha because Compaq was betting its own business on it,  E right up until they pulled the rug out on June 25, 2001.  The famous  F "commitment to Alpha" letter was displayed on Compaq's Web site until I about six weeks *after* the Alphacide had made a complete mockery of any  E use of the word 'commitment' (and by extension 'integrity' and other  D related concepts) by Compaq (and any successor corporation) for the H foreseeable future (we're now approaching 5 years with no end in sight).  I 2.  In attempting to rationalize this blatant perfidy, Compaq completely  E reversed its position that Alpha had major technical advantages over  C Itanic (not to mention already being a highly effective product in  G marked contrast to the Merced fiasco):  either it was lying vigorously  B in its 1999 white paper to that effect, or it was doing so in its I October, 2001 white paper that claimed the exact opposite (and given how  G Itanic has wallowed along since then any reasonably objective observer  ; should have little difficulty deciding which was the case).   H 3.  Compaq attempted to bolster this folderol by stating that the Alpha C engineers themselves had come to this conclusion and supported the  G switch.  Another lie, which said Alpha engineers were quick to expose:  H it turned out that some of the *server* engineers (the same group which G created that October, 2001, whitewash, by the way) who had done such a  A mediocre job with the GS320 platform that EV7 pulled most of the  G critical parts onto the chip to do them right were the culprits:  they  G seemed unhappy that EV7 had made them (and their plans for a successor  G flop) largely irrelevant, and perhaps thought that switching to Itanic  I would resurrect their previous endeavors (quite fittingly, shortly after  I HP took over this hope proved a false one, so they benefited little from   their treachery).   H 4.  Compaq also stated that Alpha was a losing proposition financially. B   I already covered this in a previous post in this thread:  $300 G million tops in overall annual expenditure vs. well over $1 billion in  C annual system profits - both figures from the same rather credible  G source (Rich Marcello - well, he actually only stated an annual profit  F figure of $800 million for VMS systems, but since Tru64 revenues were D 3/4 those of VMS's it seems pretty clear that the total exceeded $1 E billion).  And that's without any real attempt to market Alpha:  the  # *potential* profit was far greater.   G 5.  When the on-line customer base reacted rather intensely negatively  H to the sudden reversal of everything Compaq had been telling them since H it bought DEC, Compaq desperately began to try to control the damage by H stating that the forth-coming Itanics would really have a lot of 'Alpha B inside' - even specifically stating that such extensions would be F necessary for the VMS port (with statements coming from as high up as I Mark Gorham to that effect, bolstered by people like Kerry).  Of course,  E this also was utter rubbish (just the time-frames being talked about  H were absurdly short for incorporating any major enhancements to Itanic, G leaving aside the question of whether Intel was actually interested in  I the first place - perhaps it was, but the earliest we seem likely to see  C any major Alpha influence is looking like 2008 these days, whereas  I people like Mark and Kerry were talking much more like 2004).  This kind  > of talk died relatively quickly, however:  it included strong H suggestions that Intel needed Alpha to rescue the faltering Itanic, and  Intel may not have been amused.   H 6.  Compaq also attempted to alleviate customer concerns over the death H of Alpha by committing (there's that word again...) to release one more H moderately substantial upgrade to the line (EV79 - shrunk, sped up, and H with a larger on-chip cache) to replace the decommitted EV8.  Even that H proved to be a lie, of course:  instead, customers got EV7z, at a minor I increase to 1.3 GHz pretty much the product which EV7 was supposed to be   in the first place.   D That's just hitting some of the high points, of course:  Ken Farmer I asked me to write an article on the subject for Tru64.org back then, and  < it covers a lot of this ground in somewhat greater detail ( : http://www.tru64.org/stories.php?story=01/09/06/4674257 ).  + Hope that answers your question adequately.    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:57:07 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> < Subject: Re: The processor wars Part 1, "The death of Alpha", Message-ID: <43D6B0AC.1A42A39F@teksavvy.com>   John Reagan wrote:H > chips.  For years, Apple and Steve Jobs have said many negative thingsI > about Intel chips in favor of PowerPC.  Now that they've switched, were J > they lying in the past?  Is this similar to the Alpha vs Itanium switch?   Nop.  H The 8086, due to competition from AMD, morphed into a respectable 64 bitG chip to such an extent that even Intel started to make 64 bit 8086s and B agree to narrow IA64's remaining market niche to high end systems.  D Meanwhile, IBM did not deliver on the Apple specific Power chips andH Apple started to lag behind due to delays and lack of interest by IBM to! produce laptop form factor chips.   ; So Power fell behind compared to the 8086 for Apple's uses.     H So Apple moving to the 8086 is in fact more similar to VMS moving to theG 8086 after HP admits that Intel isn't delivering what had been expected D of that IA64 thing and looking at how the 8086 can provide immediateH access to a much greater market and wider range of systems, not just the restricted "high end" niche.  H The excuse "wait until McKinley" was valid after the first "beta" MercedF came out with dismal performance. Merced was to go through puberty andG become McKinley. But after that, it will just progress as the same pace E as the others. So there is nothing magic or big in the plans for IA64 G that others don't already have. With nothing magic in the wings, HP can E now look at market potential of IA64 versus market potential for 8086 0 and see that 8086 is a better value proposition.  D The 8086 will provide HP with scalable architecture from handheld toO data centre, and a single architecture to truly simplify its product offerings.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:40:04 -0500 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> < Subject: The processor wars Part 2, "The current generation"9 Message-ID: <RxBBf.8828$ft2.148028@news20.bellglobal.com>   I For all you chip heads out there, part 2/5 was posted today (2006-01-24). * Part 3/5 will appear tomorrow (2006-01-25)  7 http://www.digitimes.com/bits_chips/a20060124PR201.html     
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.8 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:46:07 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>3 Subject: Re: Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page + Message-ID: <43D6F47F.1151ADB9@comcast.net>    JOUKJ wrote: >  > David J Dachtera wrote: I > > Well, I went ahead and did it. I finally got a round TUIT and made an G > > Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page. The link is in the modified  > > .sig, below. > > & > > Go ahead and submit your comments. > > F > > I tried to make it positive and forward-thinking. Let me know if IK > > succeeded. If you want to comment privately, how to demung the Reply-to  > > should be obvious. > > G > > Yes, I know it looks like the others: *BLEAH*. I'm DCL coder, not a I > > website designer. Anyone who wants to submit an improved form of this K > > page is welcome to do so. How to demung the Reply-to should be obvious.  > > E > One basic problem : you expicitly set the colour of your letters to I > black, but did not specify a background colour : When someone (like me) N > sets the default background of his/her browser to black nothing is vissible.  $ Artifact of Netscape Navigator Gold.  > ...but I gotta ask the question: Why would you set the default; background to anything other than the installation default?    --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  & Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page! http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/   ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/   ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:50:48 -0600 6 From: "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@mac.com.spamfooler>/ Subject: Re: Why we need itanium notebooks now! D Message-ID: <craigberry-7D4C15.22504824012006@news.isp.giganews.com>  3 In article <Xrrwb0ZBCHfO@eisner.encompasserve.org>, =  koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:   P > In article <ops3t9qqrnzgicya@hyrrokkin>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: > 9 > > So it is not possible to use F and G float with Java?  > : >     It is a violation of the spec (via Sun's copyright).  B It's not just the floating point formats; it's also the exception G semantics and the NaN and infinity support.  I think you'd either have  H to do all floating point in software or have a Java implementation that H would not be recognized as Java by the people who use it or the company  that owns the standard.    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.049 ************************