0 INFO-VAX	Fri, 27 Jan 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 53      Contents: Re: Excessive paging problem FOR070.DAT files appearing Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing, Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator, Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator, Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator, Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator, Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator, Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator, Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator: 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 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 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 industry3 Re: Intel, AMD CPUs nothing more than alpha clones! " Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64& Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64& Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64& Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64& Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64& Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64& Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA644 Re: Mozilla: bookmarks and other stuff disappearing? Re: openvms.org problem  Re: openvms.org problem ( Re: problems with a new vms installation( Re: problems with a new vms installation+ Running OpenVMS/Alpha on M5 Alpha emulator? + 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" P Re: The processor wars, Part IV, =?iso-8859-1?Q?=93The?= turn to	=?iso-8859-1?Q?* Re: Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:51:06 +0100 + From: Bernhard Dorninger <bd_@gmxNOSPAM.at> % Subject: Re: Excessive paging problem . Message-ID: <1138301277.312195@news.liwest.at>  F > This might be a stupid question, (I don't know much about Java), but2 > are the Java images installed/installable ??    F No. Java apps usually come in archive files (.jar or .war for web app F servers), which are more or less ZIP archives. These archives contain F the Java classes (Java bytecode) plus other resources, such as native  libs or data files. I For smaller apps, one can also store the class files in a directory tree.  I am struck by the high G > "Read I/O" rate, indicating "Read from Disk" hard faults.   Also, the I > very high "Modified Page" and "Free List" rates indicate that the WS is I > clearly too small for the amount of code/data it is processing, i.e. it H > is storing large numbers of pages (to MP List) and grabbing Free pages= > from the FP List in order to continue reading in Code/Data. H Yes, thats right. HP's FastVM for Java is obviously a real resource hog.H Our app itself has plenty of free memory on the Java heap left. However * the VM keeps on allocating physical pages.I We are now experimenting with some settings on the VM (e.g. -Xglobal). I  2 will post here, if any there are positive results.E In addition, physical memory will be upgraded on the target machines.  > D > My other question is whether it is possible that you mixed up yourF > units ?   You mention setting heap sizes in MB, but remember that WSG > quotas are in "pagelets" (512 bytes) while VMS internal values are in  > "pages" (8K).    I wish I did ;-)E I know that, VMS has pagelets and pages. On the other hand, Java cmd  G line args for restricting heap/stack size must be specified in megs or  C kilobytes. Since Java is my primary "home", I stick to these terms.    cheers,  Bernhard   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:38:51 +0000  From: Eccles <nospam@home># Subject: FOR070.DAT files appearing 3 Message-ID: <7IOdnQ_Gm8z63ETeRVnyrA@brightview.com>    Hello and good evening,   G Where I work, we have a ES45, a DS25 and a DS10 all running VMS 7.3-2.  1 The application we use is compiled using Fortran. C Every so often in the application root the file FOR070.DAT will be  2 created, sometimes up to twenty times in a second.D We've contacted the application vendor and they don't know anything 	 about it.   G I've tried to see who the file creator is but the file ownership takes  G the default ownership of the directory (is there any way around this?).   ( Any help would be very much appreciated.   Thanks,    Martin.    ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:06:53 -0600 (CST) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)' Subject: Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing 2 Message-ID: <06012616064941_20331674@antinode.org>   From: Eccles <nospam@home>  E > Every so often in the application root the file FOR070.DAT will be   > created, [...]  F    My Fortran is so rusty that I still think it should be FORTRAN, butC as I recall, a file like that is the result of a program writing to D logical unit number 70 without first opening logical unit number 70.   alp $ type DAT.FOR         program dat          write (70, *) "Datum"          end  alp $ fort dat alp $ link dat
 alp $ run dat  alp $ type FOR070.DAT  Datum   &    Normally, this is considered a bug.  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:35:27 +0100 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> ' Subject: Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing = Message-ID: <43d94e9e$0$78280$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>   
 Eccles wrote:  > Hello and good evening,  > I > Where I work, we have a ES45, a DS25 and a DS10 all running VMS 7.3-2.  3 > The application we use is compiled using Fortran. E > Every so often in the application root the file FOR070.DAT will be  4 > created, sometimes up to twenty times in a second.F > We've contacted the application vendor and they don't know anything  > about it.  > I > I've tried to see who the file creator is but the file ownership takes  I > the default ownership of the directory (is there any way around this?).  > * > Any help would be very much appreciated.  D Have you tried running the program with FOR070 defined as a logical  pointing to "NLA0:"?  F In Fortran you can open a number of I/O channels.  These channels are E numbered from 0 to 999.  Somebody is writing to unit number 70.  The  G error should be easy to find if the vendor searches the source for the  H number 70.  I remember something about debug lines generating output on F that unit.  Debug lines are lines of code that are only compiled when F debugging is enabled during compilation.  They have a d in the column C were you place a c when you want a comment. I think it is column 5.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 14:32:21 -0800 , From: Ken Fairfield <my.full.name@intel.com>' Subject: Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing + Message-ID: <drbilm$k25$1@news01.intel.com>    Steven M. Schweda wrote: > From: Eccles <nospam@home> > F >> Every so often in the application root the file FOR070.DAT will be  >> created, [...]  > H >    My Fortran is so rusty that I still think it should be FORTRAN, butE > as I recall, a file like that is the result of a program writing to F > logical unit number 70 without first opening logical unit number 70.  @      To expand on what Steven said, if there is no explicit OPEN?   statement in the code before the WRITE to unit 70, the Fortan B   I/O library will write to the file defined by the *logical name*A   FOR070, or if that logical is not defined, to FOR070.DAT in the    process's default directory.   > alp $ type DAT.FOR >         program dat  >         write (70, *) "Datum" 
 >         end  > alp $ fort dat > alp $ link dat > alp $ run dat  > alp $ type FOR070.DAT  > Datum  > ( >    Normally, this is considered a bug.  >      I disagree that this is a bug.  It is well documented (on;   different operating systems, the file created will have a E   different, compiler-dependent name; VMS Fortran uses FOR<unit>.DAT) C   and has been with Fortran pretty much since the beginning, in one    form or another.  E      OTOH, I'd think this clearly falls under the heading of "quality E   of implementation" with the application.  If the application vendor >   couldn't answer your question, get another vendor! (SlightlyE   tongue-in-cheek, but they do deserve a verbal thrashing from you as F   the customer for not being able to diagnose a pretty basic problem.)I   Ask the vendor to search their Fortran source for all WRITE statements, I   and depending upon whether there are literal "70"'s present, or whether F   there are variables used for the unit number, search for assignments2   to the variable(s) holding the unit number, etc.         Regards, 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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:22:24 -0600 (CST) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)' Subject: Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing 2 Message-ID: <06012617222458_20331674@antinode.org>  , From: Ken Fairfield <my.full.name@intel.com>  * > >    Normally, this is considered a bug. > @ >      I disagree that this is a bug.  It is well documented (on= >   different operating systems, the file created will have a G >   different, compiler-dependent name; VMS Fortran uses FOR<unit>.DAT) E >   and has been with Fortran pretty much since the beginning, in one  >   form or another.  H    I meant a bug in the application, not in the Fortran implementation. H If you'd rather spell "is a bug" as 'falls under the heading of "qualityH of implementation"', I suppose you may.  I find "is a bug" more concise.  H    So, what's in the files?  The data could offer some clues as to who'sB writing what (and why).  (Or, as this is comp.os.vms, should I say	 "whose"?)   H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:34:27 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 5 Subject: Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator 0 Message-ID: <11tichacman3o19@corp.supernews.com>   S wrote: > Dave Froble wrote: > I >> You might want to consider a hobbyist license.  It won't make you any  B >> money, but it will get you exposure.  Just a thought.  I'm not & >> personally interested at this time. >  > D > Well I'd say that PersonalAlpha is the 'hobbyist' version at 495$  > apiece. Here's the text: > J > "To help you decide about Alpha emulation we have created PersonalAlpha D > that is proof that this concept works. PersonalAlpha is a special J > VirtualAlpha version that runs on your standard 32 bit laptop or PC and > > shows you Alpha virtualization at work. It provides limited K > functionality and performance compared to its 64 bit family members, but  0 > it is not meant for production installations." >  > S   1 Well, $465 is more than I've gotten used to.  :-)   H Having both VAX and Alpha systems running, the only use I might have is @ on a notebook.  But I don't use a notebook, and the best I have I available is a Pentium II 233 MHz, which might choke running an emulator.   I As a software developer, I think $465 should be a no-brainer.  Having no  9 use for the product, even as a novalty, $465 is too much.   G But don't attach any weight to what I say, because I probably wouldn't  A try the product if it was free, which it is for the first 5 days.    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:22:15 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>5 Subject: Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator + Message-ID: <43D983D7.BD43B351@comcast.net>    Bill Gunshannon wrote: > - > In article <43D835A3.344C394C@comcast.net>, > >         David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> writes: > > Arie wrote:  > >>
 > >> Alan, > >>F > >> we included your two comments: the download has now a 5 day trial? > >> period and we have included the Framework v2 notification.  > >>G > >> Yes we do need FrameWork v2 so it has to be installed. It will not J > >> overwrite your current version 1.1 so the applications that need that% > >> version continue to run with 1.1  > >  > > Questions: > > K > > 1. Why should a CPU emulator need .NET framework? Does it secretly tell E > > M$ how many people are still running the system from which NT and  > > children are descended?  > > J > > 2. If it needs .NET framework, how will you go about porting it to theJ > > other platforms where Charon currently runs, not the least of which isF > > OpenVMS? (Folks will want Charon-VAX *AND* AlphaEmulator to run on > > OpenVMS-I64, you know.)  > >  > D > Except that the market is much more likely to be those who are not	 > willing   - ...or able, due to ISV abandonment of VMS ...   > > to move to that IA64 thing but want to remain on VMS.  ThoseF > who are willing to move to an IA64 box that is running VMS will justF > port their applications to native mode. (I know about certification,F > but if they move to an Alpha emulator on IA64 they would have to re- > certify as well.)   G Assuming one has the source code, or that the existing VAX/Alpha images / can be translated. If neither, then guess what?    --   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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:26:41 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>5 Subject: Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator * Message-ID: <43D984E1.ACA3BF6@comcast.net>   S wrote: >  > Dave Froble wrote:I > > You might want to consider a hobbyist license.  It won't make you any B > > money, but it will get you exposure.  Just a thought.  I'm not' > > personally interested at this time.  > C > Well I'd say that PersonalAlpha is the 'hobbyist' version at 495$  > apiece. Here's the text:  1 *WAY* over priced - at least four times too high.   D I recall that due to licensing requirements, the hobbyist version ofG Tru64 had to be $99 or so. That's a little closer to what hobbyists can B absorb, but then you're talking SERIOUS hobbyists, not just casual folks.  I > "To help you decide about Alpha emulation we have created PersonalAlpha C > that is proof that this concept works. PersonalAlpha is a special I > VirtualAlpha version that runs on your standard 32 bit laptop or PC and = > shows you Alpha virtualization at work. It provides limited J > functionality and performance compared to its 64 bit family members, but0 > it is not meant for production installations."  C I don't think anyone needs to "decide" about Alpha emulation - this G group has been looking for it almost since the dawn of PicoVAX (Yes - I  *KNOW* that's a VAX emulator!).    --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  & Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page! http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/   ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/   ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:29:21 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>5 Subject: Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator + Message-ID: <43D98581.D43B59CB@comcast.net>    Arie wrote:  > H > > My first thought is that the web page says it supports 96MB of AlphaK > > memory and only 2 disks.  What can we really do in only 96MB?  The host > > > platform requires 1GB and you only get 96MB for the guest? > > $ > > Is this a temporary restriction? > > 
 > >    .../Ed  >  > Ed,  > G > PersonalAlpha will always have 96 MB Alpha memory. For production you  > will most probably need more,   D To run DECwindows, you will *DEFINITELY* need more, which limits the8 usefulness of it almost beyond he point of practicality.  + > but for that we will provide VirtualAlpha I > which runs full function and full performance on a 64-bit platform only I > and with more memory. PersonalAlpha is a subset of the real product. It + > is basically meant for personal use only.    Not scalable, obviously.  = > Indeed, hardware virtualization demands a lot of memory and F > PersonalAlpha, even with 96 MB Alpha memory, actually uses more thanE > 512 MB (the amount you would normally see on notebooks and personal H > computers). PersonalAlpha will run on 512, but it will run better on 1G > GB because there will be no page swapping. We just wanted to be quite D > honest about the real requirements. We expect that the majority ofF > PersonalAlpha users will have a 512 MB system and will be happy with  > PersonalAlpha running on that.  G I'm actually afaid to ask this: what's the pricing for the full-product  Alpha emulator?    --   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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:40:08 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 5 Subject: Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator 0 Message-ID: <11tj8vuagolpl5c@corp.supernews.com>   David J Dachtera wrote:  > Bill Gunshannon wrote: > - >>In article <43D835A3.344C394C@comcast.net>, > >>        David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> writes: >> >>>Arie wrote: >>> 	 >>>>Alan,  >>>>E >>>>we included your two comments: the download has now a 5 day trial > >>>>period and we have included the Framework v2 notification. >>>>F >>>>Yes we do need FrameWork v2 so it has to be installed. It will notI >>>>overwrite your current version 1.1 so the applications that need that $ >>>>version continue to run with 1.1 >>> 
 >>>Questions:  >>> J >>>1. Why should a CPU emulator need .NET framework? Does it secretly tellD >>>M$ how many people are still running the system from which NT and >>>children are descended? >>> I >>>2. If it needs .NET framework, how will you go about porting it to the I >>>other platforms where Charon currently runs, not the least of which is E >>>OpenVMS? (Folks will want Charon-VAX *AND* AlphaEmulator to run on  >>>OpenVMS-I64, you know.) >>>  >>D >>Except that the market is much more likely to be those who are not	 >>willing  >  > / > ...or able, due to ISV abandonment of VMS ...  >  > > >>to move to that IA64 thing but want to remain on VMS.  ThoseF >>who are willing to move to an IA64 box that is running VMS will justF >>port their applications to native mode. (I know about certification,F >>but if they move to an Alpha emulator on IA64 they would have to re- >>certify as well.)  >  > I > Assuming one has the source code, or that the existing VAX/Alpha images 1 > can be translated. If neither, then guess what?  >   ! I get some VMS work??????????????    --  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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:44:33 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 5 Subject: Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator 0 Message-ID: <11tj98acan7fj51@corp.supernews.com>   David J Dachtera wrote: 
 > S wrote: >  >>Dave Froble wrote: >>H >>>You might want to consider a hobbyist license.  It won't make you anyA >>>money, but it will get you exposure.  Just a thought.  I'm not & >>>personally interested at this time. >>C >>Well I'd say that PersonalAlpha is the 'hobbyist' version at 495$  >>apiece. Here's the text: >  > 3 > *WAY* over priced - at least four times too high.  > F > I recall that due to licensing requirements, the hobbyist version ofI > Tru64 had to be $99 or so. That's a little closer to what hobbyists can D > absorb, but then you're talking SERIOUS hobbyists, not just casual > folks. >  > I >>"To help you decide about Alpha emulation we have created PersonalAlpha C >>that is proof that this concept works. PersonalAlpha is a special I >>VirtualAlpha version that runs on your standard 32 bit laptop or PC and = >>shows you Alpha virtualization at work. It provides limited J >>functionality and performance compared to its 64 bit family members, but0 >>it is not meant for production installations." >  > E > I don't think anyone needs to "decide" about Alpha emulation - this I > group has been looking for it almost since the dawn of PicoVAX (Yes - I ! > *KNOW* that's a VAX emulator!).  >   C While the development of an Alpha emulator is an investment into a  I possible future, the day of using an Alpha emulator has not yet arrived.  H   Hardware advances (and/or software advances) still have a long way to 9 go before any emulator will come close to a current EV7z.   : One problem is the date the last EV7z will be fabbed.  :-(   --  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: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:29:21 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 5 Subject: Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator , Message-ID: <43D9AF8D.1A6F20EF@teksavvy.com>   Dave Froble wrote:< > One problem is the date the last EV7z will be fabbed.  :-(    G Haven't they been fabbed already ? My guess is that they did one or two E batches of EV7s, with the lower quality ones sold first at the slower , speed and the better units marketed as EV7z.  D Not sure when the last batch of EV6* were done since they still sell0 machines such as DS15/25 that are not EV7 based.  F It is also possible that the "last sale" date is dictated by dwindlingH stocks, with last sale occuring when sotcks reach a certain level needed2 to ensure long term support of existing customers.   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Jan 2006 10:59:22 -0800 From: icerq4a@spray.seC Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry C Message-ID: <1138301962.338975.122720@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Alan Greig wrote:  > FredK wrote: > O > > Outside of a very small corner of the world, this isn't a universal belief. O > > From a practical standpoint, Itanium is as likely to go away or be dead end   > > as HP is to shut down HP-UX. > B > An HP-UX customer I am aware of had/has about one thousand HP-UXJ > workstations and dozens of HP-UX servers. During recent upgrade planningI > HP initially advised the workstations be replaced with HP Opteron based J > workstations running Linux and the back end database/file servers remainG > HP-UX with future Itanium upgrades. The vendor of the key application D > has now terminated their HP-UX Itanium port (after all it requiredH > Itanium workstations) and although that CAD/CAM product doesn't run onG > the back end server, it has killed any prospect there might have been I > for Itanium back-ends. As well as a Linux port  there is also a Windows H > version. Ironically the company concerned evaluated the Windows clientH > on Alpha several years ago and Compaq lost the potential of up to 1000A > XP 1000 workstations (they blew away the HP-UX workstations) by > > cancelling the Windows port then cancelling the chip itself. > J > The company is now replacing all its HP-UX workstations and servers withF > Windows X64 desktops and servers. They have a lot of experience withE > Windows  servers so its not a case of they don't know what they are G > doing and it won't all be done in one go. They also know it's the one J > platform not likely to vanish from under them any time soon and they areM > happy they can make the solution work even if it wasn't their first choice.  > J > HP seems happy enough with the outcome as it still sells the desktop andI > server hardware (for the time being anyway...). I wonder how many times H > this will repeat in the future with heavy users of HP-UX workstations.  A Many times most likely. I have another and *much* larger example. C Ericsson who used to be a big Sun shop has a major project (company E wide) of replacing all their Sun Sparc workstations to Linux x86. The F result is that also most, if not all, of their servers will be non-Sun; too (the servers are on on many different platforms today.)   A Linux/Windows x86 is the only real option for workstations today, - and most low-end servers too for that matter.    ------------------------------    Date: 26 Jan 2006 11:03:03 -0800 From: icerq4a@spray.seC Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry C Message-ID: <1138302183.520948.313260@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>    Alan Greig wrote:  > FredK wrote: > O > > Outside of a very small corner of the world, this isn't a universal belief. O > > From a practical standpoint, Itanium is as likely to go away or be dead end   > > as HP is to shut down HP-UX. > B > An HP-UX customer I am aware of had/has about one thousand HP-UXJ > workstations and dozens of HP-UX servers. During recent upgrade planningI > HP initially advised the workstations be replaced with HP Opteron based J > workstations running Linux and the back end database/file servers remainG > HP-UX with future Itanium upgrades. The vendor of the key application D > has now terminated their HP-UX Itanium port (after all it requiredH > Itanium workstations) and although that CAD/CAM product doesn't run onG > the back end server, it has killed any prospect there might have been I > for Itanium back-ends. As well as a Linux port  there is also a Windows H > version. Ironically the company concerned evaluated the Windows clientH > on Alpha several years ago and Compaq lost the potential of up to 1000A > XP 1000 workstations (they blew away the HP-UX workstations) by > > cancelling the Windows port then cancelling the chip itself. > J > The company is now replacing all its HP-UX workstations and servers withF > Windows X64 desktops and servers. They have a lot of experience withE > Windows  servers so its not a case of they don't know what they are G > doing and it won't all be done in one go. They also know it's the one J > platform not likely to vanish from under them any time soon and they areM > happy they can make the solution work even if it wasn't their first choice.  > J > HP seems happy enough with the outcome as it still sells the desktop andI > server hardware (for the time being anyway...). I wonder how many times H > this will repeat in the future with heavy users of HP-UX workstations.  A Many times most likely. I have another and *much* larger example. C Ericsson who used to be a big Sun shop has a major project (company E wide) of replacing all their Sun Sparc workstations to Linux x86. The F result is that also most, if not all, of their servers will be non-Sun; too (the servers are on on many different platforms today.)   A Linux/Windows x86 is the only real option for workstations today, - and most low-end servers too for that matter.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:13:44 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 0 Message-ID: <11tibaa84at7ab1@corp.supernews.com>   bob@instantwhip.com wrote: > TONE IT DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > 2 > I am a dissatisfied customer who has every right, > to voice my displeasure with my vendor ...5 > they can either sit on their hands or do something!  > ( > EITHER MAKE ITANIUM WORK OR BRING BACK' > ALPHA OR PORT TO AMD JUNK OR SELL VMS  > TO SOMEONE WHO WILL! > & > EMULATION IS NOT AN OPTION HP OR OUR > MANAGEMENT HAS SWORN TO THROW & > EVERY HP LOGO PRODUCT (PRINTER) INTO > THE DUMPSTER!  >   4 Ha!  A real threat.  No more ink cartrige purchases!   --  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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:18:27 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 0 Message-ID: <11tibj3a3aqns95@corp.supernews.com>   icerq4a@spray.se wrote:  > C > Linux/Windows x86 is the only real option for workstations today, / > and most low-end servers too for that matter.  >   , Your 'perception' is not universally shared.   --  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: 26 Jan 2006 13:03:08 -0800 From: icerq4a@spray.seC Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry C Message-ID: <1138307395.163966.191770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Dave Froble wrote: > icerq4a@spray.se wrote:  > > E > > Linux/Windows x86 is the only real option for workstations today, 1 > > and most low-end servers too for that matter.  > >  > . > Your 'perception' is not universally shared.  E The commercial UNIX:es have a very hard time now. Sun is only falling E faster because they had a much larger cliff to fall from (compared to D AIX, HP-UX). Sun just lost 20% Sparc units year on year, and most of their x86 boxes run Linux.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:07:44 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry , Message-ID: <43D93A1E.67FB2518@teksavvy.com>   FredK wrote: >  > > EITHER MAKE ITANIUM WORK >  > What isn't working for you?   F That IA64 thing is working and is capable of adding 2 and 2 and give 4F as a result. Nobody is questioning that. What is not working with thatG IA64 thing is its image in the market and the delays which mean that by F the time IA643 gets soem new feature the rest of the market has had it for a long time already.  H Alpha gave VMS an edge. And there were no big rumours that Digital wouldH kill Alpha. And when Pfeiffer took Digital over, the initital statements3 and advertisings looked quite promising for Alpha.    H IA64 is a liability for VMS. Not only because its performance isn't whatF had been promised, not only because from day 1, it was obvious that itF wouldn't get much market share, but also because it is seen as the oneD who forced the owned of VMS to murder Alpha. Very hard to be friends" with the guy who killed your wife.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:52:41 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORGC Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 0 Message-ID: <00A50621.62D862E5@SendSpamHere.ORG>  e In article <43d902ad$1@news.langstoeger.at>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:  >  > ` >In article <1138286370.590929.253500@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, bob@instantwhip.com writes:& >>EMULATION IS NOT AN OPTION HP OR OUR >>MANAGEMENT HAS SWORN TO THROW & >>EVERY HP LOGO PRODUCT (PRINTER) INTO >>THE DUMPSTER!  > L >HP (just like Compaq and DEC) before do not care about such swears/threats.F >And unfortunately they are often right (and customer = your mangementM >still buys HP products/printers/cameras if they are the cheapest/best then). I >And also as long as income decreases in the billions get no sanctions...   F HP cameras suck and their ink jet photo printers aren't much better.    E A quasi-profession of mine has been concert photography.  I've numer- D ous credits for photography of bands and gigs appearing on fanzines,D cover art of CDs and DVDs, web sites and, in one case, a slide-show E on a DVD in the special bonus feature segment of the DVD.  I read the E professional photography rags all of the time for tips and hints (one D can *always* learn something new).  One of the regular features thatF these rags always seem to have (since the advent of the digital photo-F graphy age) is the product review of cameras or printers.  Guess whoseF products always score the lowest in these comparision and contrast re-+ views.  Here s a hint: Hopelessly Pathetic.    --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM              5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"     ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:06:34 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry , Message-ID: <43D947E2.D14C91AC@teksavvy.com>   FredK wrote:M > Outside of a very small corner of the world, this isn't a universal belief.   @ When influencial trade rags keep portraying IA64 as a commercialG failure, I wouldn't use "very small corner of the world". (and I am not ! talking about the Inquirer here).   M > From a practical standpoint, Itanium is as likely to go away or be dead end  > as HP is to shut down HP-UX.  H Spoken like a true politician. (no insult meant). Top HP execs have saidB that they had no plans to move HP-UX to the 8086. And when Linux'sB capabilities keep on increasing, HP must ask itself if it is worthF continuing development of HP-UX. And consider that HP-UX is big endianH and would need an interesting conversion to little endian to a survivingE platform.  (Note that Apple is doing it and has Rosetta emulator that / deals with endianness changes, so it is doable)   G Sun realised Solaris didn't stand a chance as a "commercial" product so H they now give it away for free, hoping to sell maitenance.  What will HP do with HP-UX ?    ------------------------------    Date: 26 Jan 2006 23:51:25 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry , Message-ID: <43d9607d$1@news.langstoeger.at>  Y In article <43d90913$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>, "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> writes: L >From a practical standpoint, Itanium is as likely to go away or be dead end >as HP is to shut down HP-UX.   3 Exactly (both will die in the not so far distance).   G You announce the death of HP-UX here ? We know it (Linux and eventually A SOLARIS/AIX will win), but you are allowed to tell it in public ? / I think, you just shot yourself in your foot...    --   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: 27 Jan 2006 00:10:54 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry , Message-ID: <43d9650e$1@news.langstoeger.at>  Z In article <11tibj3a3aqns95@corp.supernews.com>, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes: >icerq4a@spray.se wrote: >>  D >> Linux/Windows x86 is the only real option for workstations today,0 >> and most low-end servers too for that matter. > - >Your 'perception' is not universally shared.   6 Exactly. He should have written "Linux/Windows x86-64"   --   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: 27 Jan 2006 00:08:02 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry , Message-ID: <43d96462$1@news.langstoeger.at>  j In article <Qu8Cf.208493$vl2.104631@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net> writes:J >HP seems happy enough with the outcome as it still sells the desktop and I >server hardware (for the time being anyway...). I wonder how many times  G >this will repeat in the future with heavy users of HP-UX workstations.   G Yup. They don't see that LINUX eat their own UNIX systems alive and are J only happy to sell some PCs where LINUX will run then (while more and moreJ MoBo vendors like ASUS make their own PCs now - DELL is no longer the onlyK serious rival). And they also don't care that they can earn much more money L by not destroying the family jewels (like dUNIX and oVMS) and continue their& way (just like DEC and COMPAQ before).  I When Carly got the boot I thought this will change (if its not too late), 	 but no...    --   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: 26 Jan 2006 15:42:13 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry C Message-ID: <1138318933.951102.309820@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    1. marketing- 2. talk about its demise without any rebuttal      from your employer     about those two to start?    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:53:25 +0100 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry = Message-ID: <43d960e4$0$78279$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>     Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER wrote:l > In article <Qu8Cf.208493$vl2.104631@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net> writes: > K >>HP seems happy enough with the outcome as it still sells the desktop and  J >>server hardware (for the time being anyway...). I wonder how many times H >>this will repeat in the future with heavy users of HP-UX workstations. >  > I > Yup. They don't see that LINUX eat their own UNIX systems alive and are L > only happy to sell some PCs where LINUX will run then (while more and moreL > MoBo vendors like ASUS make their own PCs now - DELL is no longer the onlyM > serious rival). And they also don't care that they can earn much more money N > by not destroying the family jewels (like dUNIX and oVMS) and continue their( > way (just like DEC and COMPAQ before). > K > When Carly got the boot I thought this will change (if its not too late),  > but no...  > I I think that HP knows very well that when users move from HP-UX, OpenVMS  H or NonStop, HP looses their monopoly to sell hardware to them.  HP also H knows very well that the gross margin on non x86 systems is much higher G than the gross margin on Linux and Windows systems.  But HP often have  G the choice to put up a happy face and and sell Linux or Windows or put  I up a sour face and the sale goes to Dell, Gateway, Lenovo, or some other  
 PC vendor.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:26:02 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 0 Message-ID: <11tiq3ck9987jd3@corp.supernews.com>   icerq4a@spray.se wrote:  > Dave Froble wrote: >  >>icerq4a@spray.se wrote:  >>D >>>Linux/Windows x86 is the only real option for workstations today,0 >>>and most low-end servers too for that matter. >>>  >>. >>Your 'perception' is not universally shared. >  > G > The commercial UNIX:es have a very hard time now. Sun is only falling G > faster because they had a much larger cliff to fall from (compared to F > AIX, HP-UX). Sun just lost 20% Sparc units year on year, and most of > their x86 boxes run Linux. >   H What may be happening and what is available are not the same.  Very far  apart many times.   F Unless you're saying that purchasers must follow the trends of others?   --  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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:29:31 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 0 Message-ID: <11tiq9stnehp2c8@corp.supernews.com>   Karsten Nyblad wrote: " > Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER wrote: > H >> In article <Qu8Cf.208493$vl2.104631@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, Alan ( >> Greig <greigaln@netscape.net> writes: >>I >>> HP seems happy enough with the outcome as it still sells the desktop  J >>> and server hardware (for the time being anyway...). I wonder how many C >>> times this will repeat in the future with heavy users of HP-UX   >>> workstations.  >> >> >>J >> Yup. They don't see that LINUX eat their own UNIX systems alive and areI >> only happy to sell some PCs where LINUX will run then (while more and   >> more I >> MoBo vendors like ASUS make their own PCs now - DELL is no longer the   >> only I >> serious rival). And they also don't care that they can earn much more   >> moneyJ >> by not destroying the family jewels (like dUNIX and oVMS) and continue  >> their) >> way (just like DEC and COMPAQ before).  >>L >> When Carly got the boot I thought this will change (if its not too late), >> but no... >>K > I think that HP knows very well that when users move from HP-UX, OpenVMS  J > or NonStop, HP looses their monopoly to sell hardware to them.  HP also J > knows very well that the gross margin on non x86 systems is much higher I > than the gross margin on Linux and Windows systems.  But HP often have  I > the choice to put up a happy face and and sell Linux or Windows or put  K > up a sour face and the sale goes to Dell, Gateway, Lenovo, or some other   > PC vendor.  F Exactly correct.  If the customer is intent on wintel, then sell them C wintel.  However in the past we've seen customers who wanted to go  A another direction, and the sales types pushed them toward wintel.   3 The first is good business.  The second is suicide.    --  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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:32:22 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 0 Message-ID: <11tiqff1gfm5b9b@corp.supernews.com>   JF Mezei wrote:  > FredK wrote: >  >>>EITHER MAKE ITANIUM WORK  >> >>What isn't working for you?  >  > H > That IA64 thing is working and is capable of adding 2 and 2 and give 4H > as a result. Nobody is questioning that. What is not working with thatI > IA64 thing is its image in the market and the delays which mean that by H > the time IA643 gets soem new feature the rest of the market has had it > for a long time already. > J > Alpha gave VMS an edge. And there were no big rumours that Digital wouldJ > kill Alpha. And when Pfeiffer took Digital over, the initital statements5 > and advertisings looked quite promising for Alpha.   > J > IA64 is a liability for VMS. Not only because its performance isn't whatH > had been promised, not only because from day 1, it was obvious that itH > wouldn't get much market share, but also because it is seen as the oneF > who forced the owned of VMS to murder Alpha. Very hard to be friends$ > with the guy who killed your wife.  ; That depends upon whether you wanted your wife killed.  :-)    --  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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:32:18 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry , Message-ID: <43D96A01.73C6DCCD@teksavvy.com>   Karsten Nyblad wrote: J > I think that HP knows very well that when users move from HP-UX, OpenVMSI > or NonStop, HP looses their monopoly to sell hardware to them.  HP also I > knows very well that the gross margin on non x86 systems is much higher H > than the gross margin on Linux and Windows systems.  But HP often haveH > the choice to put up a happy face and and sell Linux or Windows or putJ > up a sour face and the sale goes to Dell, Gateway, Lenovo, or some other > PC vendor.  ? You need to consider how clueless and detached from reality top H management really are. They are told by Wall Street Casino Analysts thatF the future is in commodity industry standard, they are told the future9 is in linux and that proprietary OS don't have a future.    A How do you think top management think when the time comes to make ; decisions ? Following "industry trends" are very important.   H Carly didn't start "Adaptive Enterprise". She was told by some trade ragF /Wall Street Casino  (WSC) analyst that it was the future so she did a	 "me too".   D An industry leader is one who can dismiss what the clueless analystsF suggest and truly lead the industry. HP has been simply following what* the analysts have been suggesting be done.  F I think Hurd will do great things in terms of improving execution. Not sure he will be a "leader".   > Gerstner was a leader. He was able to go against WSC analyst's) recommendations and keep IBM as a whole.  E Steve Jobs is a leader because he was able to truly lead and innovate $ beyond what WSC analysts predicted.   F Microsoft is losing steam in terms of leadership. It was analysts thatD suggest Microsoft try the delivery of services over the internet. SoE Gates decided to jump into that.  (And it can be argued that MS never  actually lead the industry).   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 02:23:37 GMT 5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger) C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry L Message-ID: <rdeininger-2601062124010001@user-uinj44n.dialup.mindspring.com>  4 In article <43d8fabe$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>, "FredK"# <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> wrote:    >> EITHER MAKE ITANIUM WORK  >  >What isn't working for you?  / I think his Caps Lock key has gone bad again...    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:37:25 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry + Message-ID: <43D98765.15957174@comcast.net>   ! VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:  > g > In article <43d902ad$1@news.langstoeger.at>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:  > >  > > b > >In article <1138286370.590929.253500@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, bob@instantwhip.com writes:( > >>EMULATION IS NOT AN OPTION HP OR OUR! > >>MANAGEMENT HAS SWORN TO THROW ( > >>EVERY HP LOGO PRODUCT (PRINTER) INTO > >>THE DUMPSTER!  > > N > >HP (just like Compaq and DEC) before do not care about such swears/threats.H > >And unfortunately they are often right (and customer = your mangementO > >still buys HP products/printers/cameras if they are the cheapest/best then). K > >And also as long as income decreases in the billions get no sanctions...  > F > HP cameras suck and their ink jet photo printers aren't much better. > G > A quasi-profession of mine has been concert photography.  I've numer- F > ous credits for photography of bands and gigs appearing on fanzines,E > cover art of CDs and DVDs, web sites and, in one case, a slide-show G > on a DVD in the special bonus feature segment of the DVD.  I read the G > professional photography rags all of the time for tips and hints (one F > can *always* learn something new).  One of the regular features thatH > these rags always seem to have (since the advent of the digital photo-H > graphy age) is the product review of cameras or printers.  Guess whoseH > products always score the lowest in these comparision and contrast re-- > views.  Here s a hint: Hopelessly Pathetic.   $ Does HP even MAKE a pro-jock camera?   --   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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:41:09 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry + Message-ID: <43D98845.41979A09@comcast.net>    FredK wrote: > E > "Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER" <peter@langstoeger.at> wrote in message ( > news:43d910da$1@news.langstoeger.at...8 > > In article <43d8fabe$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>, "FredK"& > <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> writes: > > >> EITHER MAKE ITANIUM WORK  > > >   > > >What isn't working for you? > > N > > Applications, because ISV don't port (or need years longer than promised), > M > Many, many applications and middleware is there.  Other major ones are just  > around the corner. > 6 > > (most likely) because platform is seen as dead end > M > Outside of a very small corner of the world, this isn't a universal belief. M > From a practical standpoint, Itanium is as likely to go away or be dead end  > as HP is to shut down HP-UX.  < Lack of an OpenVMS mention is glaringly obvious there, Fred.  A (Cue: Pundits who will interpret that as saying something without  actually saying it.)   --   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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:35:05 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry + Message-ID: <43D986D9.5E7C1310@comcast.net>    JF Mezei wrote:  > [snip] > Re: black helicopters. > N > We were fooled once with Alpha. Don't let them fool you about VMS once more.  B No, we weren't "fooled" - we were unceremoniously hung out to dry.   --   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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:45:53 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry 0 Message-ID: <11tj9agp92hil92@corp.supernews.com>   David J Dachtera wrote:  > JF Mezei wrote:  >  >>[snip] >>Re: black helicopters. >>N >>We were fooled once with Alpha. Don't let them fool you about VMS once more. >  > D > No, we weren't "fooled" - we were unceremoniously hung out to dry. >    In a pouring down rainstorm!   --  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: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:11:41 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> C Subject: Re: HP, Intel becoming laughing stock of computer industry / Message-ID: <11tjebgbr6p351@corp.supernews.com>    Robert Deininger wrote: 6 > In article <43d8fabe$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>, "FredK"% > <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> wrote:  >  >  >>>EITHER MAKE ITANIUM WORK  >> >>What isn't working for you?  >  > 1 > I think his Caps Lock key has gone bad again...    DAMMIT!!  Don't do that!  B I was just swallowing some diet Pepsi, and I had to clean off the 4 monitor and keyboard before I could respond to this!   DAMMIT!    --  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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:23:10 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> < Subject: Re: Intel, AMD CPUs nothing more than alpha clones!0 Message-ID: <11tibs6mc7tr2bb@corp.supernews.com>   JF Mezei wrote:  > Alan Greig wrote:  > J >>overhaul the x86, even though it sorely needs it. When Fab 36 cranks up,I >>AMD will overcome that fear. AMD64 processors will take on performance, H >>scalability, resource management, and availability-related instruction6 >>set extensions that will be proprietary to AMD CPUs. >  >  > C > Didn't AMD agree to let Intel use its 64 bit extensions designs ?  > F > If those extra instructions are truly going to be proprietary, it isG > probably to satisfy the requirements of Sun which is an AMD only shop D > and wants to scale its 8086 systems up, so those instructrions are > probably going to help it. > I > BTW, yesterday, CNET reported that AMD's market share had now surpassed D > 20%.  In some metrics , I have seen that it surpassed 10%. But allF > reports agree that AMD is substantially increasing its market share.  G It's a bit like Linux.  When the hype/whatever reaches a critical mass   things start to feed off it.  A What I've read is that in SMP and servers Opteron will retain an  H advantage, but in single processor desktop Intel may regain the lead in C the second half of 2006.  Talk is cheaper than doing, so we'll see.   F Regardless, AMD is now acceptable to many, and has the rep to command  the customer's purchases.    --  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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:30:34 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> + Subject: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64 , Message-ID: <43D977A5.3E42193F@teksavvy.com>  c http://news.com.com/Allies+pledge+10+billion+to+boost+Itanium/2100-1006_3-6031773.html?tag=nefd.top   = Intel Solution Alliance gets a $10 billion budget until 2010.   C I think this is the first time I hear of a commitment for that IA64  thing beyond 2007.  D But that is a 10 billion going to the marketing alliance, not to theN development of the chip.  My guess is that the contract is full of easy exits.  C Note that not too long before Compaq murdered Alpha, it also helped  create Alpha Processor Inc.    ------------------------------    Date: 26 Jan 2006 20:17:52 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) / Subject: Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64 3 Message-ID: <kl1V$aNs9Zm1@eisner.encompasserve.org>   \ In article <43D977A5.3E42193F@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:e > http://news.com.com/Allies+pledge+10+billion+to+boost+Itanium/2100-1006_3-6031773.html?tag=nefd.top  > ? > Intel Solution Alliance gets a $10 billion budget until 2010.  > E > I think this is the first time I hear of a commitment for that IA64  > thing beyond 2007.  E 	"that IA64 thing".  Can't bring yourself to exclaim:  Wow!  Can you?   F > But that is a 10 billion going to the marketing alliance, not to the > development of the chip.    ? 	I guess some things never change, do they JF?  You didn't even < 	read it did you?  I honestly refuse to believe your reading= 	comprehension is that poor.  Here... in the first paragraph:   K "The companies said Thursday that they will spend the money on research and G development, marketing, and work to help software companies support the  high-end processor."  ? 	Research and development is key here JF.  Money is being spent  	on development.  6 > My guess is that the contract is full of easy exits.  
 	Ha ha ha.  E > Note that not too long before Compaq murdered Alpha, it also helped  > create Alpha Processor Inc.    	Yawn.  @ 	Guess that whole Itanic moniker is getting funnier and funnier,
 	isn't it? 				Rob    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:34:47 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> / Subject: Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64 , Message-ID: <43D986AE.6B59A258@teksavvy.com>   Rob Young wrote:H >         Research and development is key here JF.  Money is being spent >         on development.   G Does the IA64 Alliance send money back to Intel for actual chip develop H ? I was under the impression that the alliance's goal was to spend money8 to attract developper of software, not chip development.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:54:20 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>/ Subject: Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64 + Message-ID: <43D98B5B.D553EA64@comcast.net>    Rob Young wrote: > ^ > In article <43D977A5.3E42193F@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:g > > http://news.com.com/Allies+pledge+10+billion+to+boost+Itanium/2100-1006_3-6031773.html?tag=nefd.top  > > A > > Intel Solution Alliance gets a $10 billion budget until 2010.  > > G > > I think this is the first time I hear of a commitment for that IA64  > > thing beyond 2007. > N >         "that IA64 thing".  Can't bring yourself to exclaim:  Wow!  Can you?  
 wow (*snore*)    > H > > But that is a 10 billion going to the marketing alliance, not to the > > development of the chip. > H >         I guess some things never change, do they JF?  You didn't evenE >         read it did you?  I honestly refuse to believe your reading F >         comprehension is that poor.  Here... in the first paragraph: > M > "The companies said Thursday that they will spend the money on research and I > development, marketing, and work to help software companies support the  > high-end processor." > H >         Research and development is key here JF.  Money is being spent >         on development.    How much is being spent on:    o Marketing  o ISV Recruitment  o Marketing H o ISV recovery (bringing ISVs who have abandoned VMS back into the fold) o Marketing 1 o getting OpenVMS-I64 into the technology schools  o Marketing   ) Those are even MORE key than development.   8 > > My guess is that the contract is full of easy exits. >  >         Ha ha ha.  > G > > Note that not too long before Compaq murdered Alpha, it also helped  > > create Alpha Processor Inc.  >  >         Yawn.  > I >         Guess that whole Itanic moniker is getting funnier and funnier,  >         isn't it? % >                                 Rob   G In light of such cavalier responses, do you actually wonder why that is  true?   @ You may be secure in the knowledge that you can probably elect aD "retirement package" before too much longer. Congrats. I'm happy forH you. From then on, your fortunes will no longer be tied to VMS, HP, etc.  = For the rest of us, however, the reality is a bit more stark.    --   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: 26 Jan 2006 21:35:05 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) / Subject: Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64 3 Message-ID: <5sF2ad$SnTDl@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <43D98B5B.D553EA64@comcast.net>, David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> writes: > Rob Young wrote: >>  _ >> In article <43D977A5.3E42193F@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: h >> > http://news.com.com/Allies+pledge+10+billion+to+boost+Itanium/2100-1006_3-6031773.html?tag=nefd.top >> >B >> > Intel Solution Alliance gets a $10 billion budget until 2010. >> >H >> > I think this is the first time I hear of a commitment for that IA64 >> > thing beyond 2007.  >>  O >>         "that IA64 thing".  Can't bring yourself to exclaim:  Wow!  Can you?  >  > wow (*snore*)  >  	Hee-hee-hee >>  I >> > But that is a 10 billion going to the marketing alliance, not to the  >> > development of the chip.  >>  I >>         I guess some things never change, do they JF?  You didn't even F >>         read it did you?  I honestly refuse to believe your readingG >>         comprehension is that poor.  Here... in the first paragraph:  >>  N >> "The companies said Thursday that they will spend the money on research andJ >> development, marketing, and work to help software companies support the >> high-end processor."  >>  I >>         Research and development is key here JF.  Money is being spent  >>         on development. >  > How much is being spent on:  > 
 > o Marketing  > o ISV Recruitment 
 > o Marketing J > o ISV recovery (bringing ISVs who have abandoned VMS back into the fold)
 > o Marketing 3 > o getting OpenVMS-I64 into the technology schools 
 > o Marketing  > + > Those are even MORE key than development.  >   6 	Billion here, billion there... $10 billion and prettyA 	soon you're talking real money.  But think about the investment. C 	Very wise marketing strategy to continue to play up the investment , 	angle.  Hard to FUD it up, Itanica, etc....  9 >> > My guess is that the contract is full of easy exits.  >>   >>         Ha ha ha. >>  H >> > Note that not too long before Compaq murdered Alpha, it also helped  >> > create Alpha Processor Inc. >>   >>         Yawn. >>  J >>         Guess that whole Itanic moniker is getting funnier and funnier, >>         isn't it?& >>                                 Rob > I > In light of such cavalier responses, do you actually wonder why that is  > true?  > B > You may be secure in the knowledge that you can probably elect aF > "retirement package" before too much longer. Congrats. I'm happy for > you.  > 	Lord willing, I'll be working until my early 70s.  I'm a LONG? 	way from retirement.  Maybe if you are in Nashua in May we can C 	sit down and share a brew and trade stories.  I prefer to be able  ( 	to see through mine.  That's real brew.  E > From then on, your fortunes will no longer be tied to VMS, HP, etc.   > 	Maybe not.  But Enterprise storage is a fascinating thing and> 	many shy away from it.  Not for the faint of heart, you know:  Z http://www.fujitsu-siemens.hu/products/storage/disk_systems/highend/symmetrix_dmx3000.html  M It uses integrated packaging to deliver the highest storage density available O today, and can be scaled with up to 576 drives (84 TB of raw capacity), 128 GB   cache, and 64 front-end ports.    > 	Idea here of course is to not be one-dimensional.  Buggy whip 	manufacturers, etc.  ? > For the rest of us, however, the reality is a bit more stark.   ? 	Hmmm... part of the curse actually.  Sweat of the brow and all : 	that!  One day, we'll be free of the curse, or maybe not.   				Rob   G And the wind shall say:               "Here were decent godless people: K                                        Their only monument the asphalt road G                                        And a thousand lost golf balls." >                                                 -- T.S. Eliot    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:29:37 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> / Subject: Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64 0 Message-ID: <11tjfd54rr7o31b@corp.supernews.com>   JF Mezei wrote: e > http://news.com.com/Allies+pledge+10+billion+to+boost+Itanium/2100-1006_3-6031773.html?tag=nefd.top  > ? > Intel Solution Alliance gets a $10 billion budget until 2010.  > E > I think this is the first time I hear of a commitment for that IA64  > thing beyond 2007. > F > But that is a 10 billion going to the marketing alliance, not to theP > development of the chip.  My guess is that the contract is full of easy exits. > E > Note that not too long before Compaq murdered Alpha, it also helped  > create Alpha Processor Inc.   E Ok, forget c.o.v.  Read what some other people have to say about the  G itanic.  Not one favorable comment.  Only 4 unfavorable that I saw, so  @ maybe there are 4 itanic haters outside c.o.v.  Figure the odds.   --  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: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:31:04 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> / Subject: Re: Intel/Hp spend $10 billion on IA64 0 Message-ID: <11tjffobgtelq65@corp.supernews.com>   David J Dachtera wrote:   B > You may be secure in the knowledge that you can probably elect aF > "retirement package" before too much longer. Congrats. I'm happy forJ > you. From then on, your fortunes will no longer be tied to VMS, HP, etc.  G Well, if you're looking at age, Rob's probably one of the younger guys  	 in c.o.v.    --  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: 26 Jan 2006 12:03:44 -0800< From: "Hein RMS van den Heuvel" <heinvandenheuvel@gmail.com>= Subject: Re: Mozilla: bookmarks and other stuff disappearing? C Message-ID: <1138305824.216234.324390@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   1 >> I have a machine which I use ONLY for Mozilla.   + Ditto here, just using Firefox, Acrobat....   A I use a $100 Linux "Thin Client". 50W, NO fan, 1600x1200 graphics  capable.4 It NFS mounts my SimpleTech NAS drive for downloads.  E I bought it through HP remarketing, when they offered 50% of LCD with  purchase of desktop.B http://h71016.www7.hp.com/html/hpremarketing/daily.asp#workstationD PC542AR#ABA  	Refurbished  HP t5515 800MHz Linux 128 128 Rmkt TC ... $139.50   ? Anyway, the Firefox browser that comes with it occasionaly gets F confused, prompt me witha new 'profile' and I loose my bookmarks. This; morning that happened for the second time, and I decided to  investigate.  < Found a file called: /mnt/root/.mozilla/firefox/profiles.ini It contained ----------------------------	 [General]  StartWithLastProfile=1  
 [Profile0] Name=default IsRelative=1 Path=4ls4r1uy.default   
 [Profile1] Name=Default User  IsRelative=1 Path=0gc3sibp.Default User	 Default=1   --------------------------------D I deleted  the [Profile 1] section and moving the Default=1 into the first section.  Voila... my bookmarks were back.  B I then removed the profile-1 directory tree: 0gc3sibp.Default User  ' Perhaps something similar is happening?    Hein.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:00:39 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>   Subject: Re: openvms.org problem, Message-ID: <43D93876.4DF7254E@teksavvy.com>   Kenneth Farmer wrote:  > " > Fixed.  Had to reboot db server.     Reboot ? What's that ?   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 03:24:32 GMT 6 From: "Kenneth Farmer" <kfarmer@NOSPAM.spyderbyte.com>  Subject: Re: openvms.org problem; Message-ID: <QngCf.37515$iQ.14799@tornado.southeast.rr.com>   ; "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message  & news:43D93876.4DF7254E@teksavvy.com... > Kenneth Farmer wrote:  >># >> Fixed.  Had to reboot db server.  >  >  > Reboot ? What's that ?  
 Understand...   G Pronounced: Ree-boot.  A verb meaning to stop and restart an operating   system and associated hardware.   H For you OpenVMS admins, rebooting is something that has to be done with M non-OpenVMS operating systems when there's a problem that can't be solved by   restarting a running process.   L It's something the rest of the computer industry has to deal with regularly.   :)   Ken   % _____________________________________  Kenneth Farmer <>< 336-736-7376 4 www.OpenVMS.org | dba.OpenVMS.org | dcl.OpenVMS.org    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:54:12 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 1 Subject: Re: problems with a new vms installation , Message-ID: <43D936F3.2D45905F@teksavvy.com>  ! michael.grunditz@telia.com wrote: R > I have no license named  NET-APP-SUP-* but here is the output from tcpip$config:$ > 20 - XDM          Disabled Stopped  F Which license do you have which allows TCPIP Services to start ? Is it UCX ?    Also,   G what does $TCPIP SHOW SERVICE   show ? Does it say anything about XDM ?    If it shows XDM, you might try:    $TCPIP SET NOSERVICE XDM   and also just to make sure  $ $TCPIP SET CONF ENABLE NOSERVICE XDM  . Then, go back to the @SYS$MANABER:TCPIP$CONFIG  ( and try again to define the XDM service.   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jan 2006 00:27:43 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)1 Subject: Re: problems with a new vms installation , Message-ID: <43d968ff$1@news.langstoeger.at>  \ In article <43D936F3.2D45905F@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:" >michael.grunditz@telia.com wrote:S >> I have no license named  NET-APP-SUP-* but here is the output from tcpip$config: % >> 20 - XDM          Disabled Stopped  > G >Which license do you have which allows TCPIP Services to start ? Is it  >UCX ?  I Don't know. Probably. But I think, the license is not the (only) culprit. K TCPIP$CONFIG should not tell invalid option for a service which it displays F as allowed. eg. if the license is only UCX-CLIENT (or NET-APP-SUP-150)I then XDM is (as a server service) not allowed and TCPIP$CONFIG would then I show it with "no license" (or similar) in the list and if you then insist G to select the number of the XDM service then said message would appear.   G So, the exact license name and TCPIP version number is of interest now.   H >what does $TCPIP SHOW SERVICE   show ? Does it say anything about XDM ? >   >If it shows XDM, you might try: >  >$TCPIP SET NOSERVICE XDM  >  >and also just to make sure  > % >$TCPIP SET CONF ENABLE NOSERVICE XDM  > / >Then, go back to the @SYS$MANABER:TCPIP$CONFIG  > ) >and try again to define the XDM service.    Good advice.  I But, if the TCPIP$CONFIG.COM has a bug (and I know of some in older TCPIP M versions) then it will not help. Creating the account/directory/files/service L by hand would help (but of course, only if the license is not a client one).  K Or even better, an upgrade to the current version/eco level of TCPIP itself 6 (TCPIP V5.4 ECO5 for VMS V7.3-2 or V5.5ECO1 for V8.2).   --   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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:05:17 -0500 2 From: "Timothy Stark" <fsword7_nospam@comcast.net>4 Subject: Running OpenVMS/Alpha on M5 Alpha emulator?: Message-ID: <y5idnbueEPBZ7ETenZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com>   Hello folks,  K After I read some postings under "Running OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator" on  L this newsgroup, I found a few Alpha emulators include "M5 emulator".  I was M able downloaded a copy of M5 source codes and NetBSD and Linux system images  J from sourceforge.net and reviewed some documents, etc.  I learned that M5 D enulator was able boot and run NetBSD, Linux, and Tru64 without any ? problems.  How about running OpenVMS/Alpha on that M5 emulator?    Thanks!  Tim    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 18:44:15 -0000 E From: "John Wallace" <johnwallace4 at yahoo dot nospam dot co dot uk> 4 Subject: Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshootingA Message-ID: <43d91881$0$6953$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>   3 "Rich Jordan" <jordan@ccs4vms.com> wrote in message = news:1138295761.267304.279930@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...   E > Unfortunately even the CLI manual doesn't provide any way to access C > line quality information; only statistics.  I can see receive and 3 > transmit errors, but no SNR or noise levels, etc.   H You only need line SNR margin etc if you can't get at line error counts.I Your particular router claims to be SNMP manageable and claims to support I the ADSL line MIB. A competent network person should be able to use their I favourite SNMP/MIB browser tool to tell you whether line errors come into K this picture at the times when folks are seeing problems (the ADSL line MIB J should have error counters for day to date and for each previous 15 minuteA interval in the previous 48 hours, or something like that, iirc).   C DSL line errors lead to IP packet loss, and IP packet loss on a TCP J connection (obviously) leads to timeouts and retransmissions and other BadL Things. Even in a UDP world line errors lead to Bad Things. If you don't seeL any line errors at all then at least you know for sure that you need to look
 elsewhere.  G Wrt traceroutes: the stuff you see on a traceroute may or may not match L what's really happening; a typical DSL ISP may well have assorted tunnels ofL their own that you can't see, hiding boxes they think you don't need to knowJ about; the important bit is probably the visible end to end latency rather% than the detail of how it gets there.    > 
 > Such fun...  >   K Fun isn't the obvious word. Today's ISP technology isn't always designed to G support "yesterday's" time-sensitive low-data-volume applications (like ' telnet, or SCADA RTUs, or whatever...).   C Some DSL ISPs are buying "traffic management" kit (from people like K Ellacoya) which "prioritises" different kinds of traffic, in theory so that K long duration bulk downloads (ftp, news binaries, P2P) don't swamp the more L time-critical traffic (typically web browsing and pings). These boxes aren'tG always correctly configured or managed, and can introduce "interesting"  behaviours.   I On another train of thought, how easy would it be to temporarily lose the K VPN (for testing purposes) and just connect "in the clear", in case the VPN L is confusing the picture? You didn't say what kind of VPN was in the picture= either, not that I'm a VPN expert, but someone else might be.   L And independent of that, how easy would it be to put a loopback connector orE equivalent on a spare serial port on the server (at customer end) and H configure that port for testing purposes... eg telnet to the looped-backJ port, type away, and see what kind of response you get, so you can perhapsF see the problem first hand? You could even see if there's an old commsK analyser around and let it test data to the looped back port for a while... L not sure how well that would tolerate long latencies but even if you haven'tJ got a comms analyser a bit of creative DCL should be able to do some basic testing.  J Even if  *you* don't see the problem to the looped-back port, if the usersJ *are* still seeing the delayed-echo problem, you've got a bit more info toK go on - one looped back setup that appears to work, and one vaguely similar J one (same terminal server, same line, same ISP, same VPN) that has latency	 problems.   J Without knowing what the application is that we're talking about here, I'dL be tempted to check that terminal flow control (control-S/control-Q) behavesD in the way you're expecting it to. Then again that may be completely irrelevant.   K One other thing: when you had a leased line you had it all to yourself. Now F you're on DSL it's likely your bandwidth is shared with many others atG various places, so even if it works fine sometimes, if traffic patterns C change and congestion occurs somewhere between the endpoints (as it L inevitably will) it is likely that Bad Things will happen to your users. AndL you'll almost certainly have no lower-layer indication that traffic is beingI lost. ATM VCs have their "congestion" bits, pure IP has something vaguely E similar, but afaict the IP/ATM mixture in a DSL ISP has no end to end G congestion indication in common use. There are reasons DSL bandwidth is < significantly cheaper than the equivalent speed leased line.   Food for thought?    hth  John Wallace   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Jan 2006 13:58:06 -0800( From: "Rich Jordan" <jordan@ccs4vms.com>4 Subject: Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshootingC Message-ID: <1138312686.853631.196750@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    John, D      thanks for replying.  For the time being we're holding; the ISP@ has indicated that Bellsouth has acknowledged the problem and is= working on it.  We don't have any further info at this point.   D      Right now we don't have any peecees or other systems capable ogG being an SNMP browser at the remote sites, and nobody really capable of G installing or running one at the central location.  I can probably open G up an SNMP rule on the firewall central site firewall and let the Alpha G do the very basic browsing that the tools VMS comes with is capable of, 
 but thats it.   D      The purpose of trying the ping tests to the intervening routers> was to see if we could localize the latency to one box, or oneD connection; we were not able to do that.  However thats a good pointD about the traffic shaping capability, even though for traffic withinD the tunnel they should not be aware of the traffic type... of course: they could be downgrading the tunnel traffic priority too.  ?      We're running Sonicwall firewalls at each location.  These @ firewalls provide IPSec VPN site to site tunnels.  We have triedC bypassing the tunnels completely by turning them off and setting up D telnet 'holes' in the central site firewall for the users to come inG directly; we also tried leaving the tunnels up and having some users go / through the tunnel and others go outside of it.   B      The applications in question are good old fashioned SMG basedC screen apps on VT terminals.  The lag is expecially noticeable when F typing in larger fields, when scrollable regions scroll, and on screenB refresh/updates.  There is no question about system latency; localE users, and the one or two remote terminals left on the MUXservers due F to the problems are running fast and clean.  Flow control is XON/XOFF, just as it was on the DECmuxes.   F      We  have telnetted to the DECservers and then telnetted back out,G either to the customer central site or our own location.  When we go to F the customer site, the latency is very obvious; when we telnet back toD our own system (yet another telnet hole in the firewall) its presentC but not as bad subjectively... but then I haven't had time to run a G side-by-side test either.  Our own telnet access to the customer system B (through another tunnel) runs nicely.  No comm analyzer available.    D      We have other customers running in this configuration, with theF same (or nearly) equipment; the main difference is these are brand newD sparkly DECserver 90M+ units with DNAS V3.2, and the other sites allD use DECserver 90M units with DNAS 2.2 or 2.3a.  Of course the othersA are not on Bellsouth ADSL with PPPoE underpinnings either, though F several sites are running similar applications over 'normal' ADSL with# faster uplink speeds without issue.    Rich   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:01:12 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 4 Subject: Re: Telnet over WAN latency troubleshooting, Message-ID: <43D946A0.7689C3EE@teksavvy.com>   Rich Jordan wrote:H > the telnet/menu interface.  I got info on getting to the CLI, and evenF > found a usable CLI manual (a royal pain since its not reachable by a. > link; you have to do just the right search).  D When you don't know what you are looking for, best thing is to printF that manual. It is then far easier to scan through the commands to see- which one might yield something of interest.    A Normally, the CLI is a superset of the web interface information. G Consider that when the modem/router boots, it reads the equivalent of a J command procedure made up of CLI commands to setup some of the parameters.  E > Unfortunately even the CLI manual doesn't provide any way to access C > line quality information; only statistics.  I can see receive and 3 > transmit errors, but no SNR or noise levels, etc.   D Because you have a router/modem combo, does the CLI have any section* that deals with modem specific commands ?   E > The web interface manual does list the info, but I can't get to the B > modem via a browser, at least at this time, since that access is: > restricted to traffic coming in over the LAN interface.   G You could temporarily use the line interface to configure the router to 3 allow WAN side access to ist management interface.    3 > (so its modem - ISP router - ISP router - modem).   G Are the sites in the same city ? I would assume so because 2 routers is : a very "clean", short ISP route (but see later about VPN).   OK, if I rephase the above:   8  client-modem - ISP-router1 - ISP router2 - server-modem  G Do all the client modems connect to ISP-ROUTER1 ? Or do they connect to , a variety of routers depending on location ?  G You need to ask your ISP if router1 and router2 are physically the same  machine with 2 interfaces.          2 This is what a DSL with PPPOE service looks like :  ; [client router]----<DSL>----[DSLAM]---<atm>---[BAS]----<atm  cloud>---[ISP router]   H A BAS is loaded with a database of ISPs and to which ATM address packets) destined to that ISP should be forwarded.   G In my case, my ISP has only one router accepting PPPoE sessions. So all F BAS in Bell Canada territory are programmed to send all PPPoE for thatD ISP to that one ATM address. But other ISPs will tell the telco thatG traffic from regionX are to go to THIS router and traffic from  regionY  are to go to THAT router.     E What you want to know if whether all your clients connect to the same D Central Office (aka, use the same <atm> link between the one or many DSLAMs in he CO and the BAS.  G If they are not connecting to the same CO, you need to find out if they G connect to the same BAS. (Tracing the PPPoE session establishement will F reveal the BAS, and some routers will also display that information onG the currently established PPPoE session.  From the early stage of PPPoE H session establishement, the router will send all packets to the ethernetD address of the BAS. (Basic Access Server, a glorified PPPoE router).  E A BAS can serve multiple COs in a region. So if you (server) and your G clients are in the same city, it is possible all your packets are going  through the same BAS.       D Between the BAS and your ISP is a big ATM cloud where performance isF monitored by the telco because it is part of their commercial offeringF shared by many customers.  But between the cloud and your ISP's router> is a private ATM link. Your ISP should know if its ATM link is@ oversubscribed or not. (but they may not admit to you if it is).  D The one area that is in a state of limbo is the ATM link between theD DSLAM and the BAS. This is generally a dedicated line and the telcosH generally only react after complaints coming from a lot of people served= by the DSLAM or if they exceed certain number of subscribers.   G But before your ISP can send a complaint to the Telco about the telco's 9 infrastructure, the ISP must rule out all other problems.   : Ask your ISP if the telco provide a test PPPoE account. InE Qubec/Ontario, the telco provices a "test@test" PPPoE account anyone D can use and it can connect to a single host that you can ping, which# helps isolate performance problems.   G Also, you mentioned something about VPN. Does your ISP provide you with F a VPN ? This would mean that you wouldn't see anything between router1> and router2 even though there may be tons of stuff in between.  ? One thing you could do is use a totally different ISP to try to E traceroute to both of those routers to see just how close they are to F each other in terms of network topology. (or provide their IP adresses8 here so that we can traceroutre from different regions).    > If the clients do not connect to the same router, and they allG experience latency AT THE SAME TIME, then it is more likely the problem J would be between ISP-router2 and server-modem (inclusive of both devices).    F So if you do a traceroute during high latency times, you should try toH do it from all client sites and see if the delays occure at ISP-ROUTER1,* or ISP-ROUTER2 or at your SERVER's ROUTER.  ; If it happens at ISP router1, then it could be anything of:    DSL line problems  DSLAM to BAS link overloaded BAS overloaded    ? Also, you need to consider if your clients and servers are in a C different city, the distance between those cities does add latency. K Going from east coast to west coast can add at least 40ms to the trip time.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:48:31 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> < Subject: Re: The processor wars Part 1, "The death of Alpha"0 Message-ID: <11tidbslmepf610@corp.supernews.com>   Karsten Nyblad wrote:  > Ken Fairfield wrote: >  >> Karsten Nyblad wrote: >> >>> JF Mezei wrote:  >>> J >>>> The 8086, due to competition from AMD, morphed into a respectable 64  >>>> bitL >>>> chip to such an extent that even Intel started to make 64 bit 8086s andG >>>> agree to narrow IA64's remaining market niche to high end systems.  >>>  >>>  >>> J >>> I have found no information stating that the Duo Core chip implements H >>> EMT64.  I might be wrong, but I think Apple has chosen a 32bit chip J >>> for their first generation of Intel chips.  I wonder why they did not E >>> buy AMD chips instead so that they could base their computers on  % >>> 64-bit technology from the start.  >> >> >> >> [$ set mode/nostealth]  >>: >> Let me just note that Apple have told Intel they're not: >> interested in the server market, i.e., stuff that would; >> need 64 bit capable cpus.  It's just not where they want  >> to go, at least at present. >>9 >> The big deal these days is low-power/high performance, ? >> which is where Intel is going in our development (especially > >> important for laptops, which is where all the market growth >> is).  >>A >> Oh, and while I generally abhor marketing and marketing terms, ? >> e.g., "OpenVMS", that would be "Core Duo"...probably (tm)...  >> not the reverse.  >>E >> And now I'll just step into the background and out of sight... :-)  >> >> [$ set mode/stealth]  >> >>     -Ken  >  > E > Well it is no secret that servers are not that important to Apple.  I > However, people want more and more memory on their personal computers.  I > It seems like PCs are sold with 1GB of memory these days, and assuming  I > that that will double every couple of years, PCs will be sold with 4GB  C > before the end of the decade.  Do you think, people will find it  G > acceptable to be restricted to less than 4GB of virtual memory, when  # > they have 4GB of physical memory?  > G > Dell is selling workstations with Windows 64-bit edition and 16GB of  	 > memory.  > G > Microsoft is coming with a 3D interface to Windows.  I doubt it will  I > make people more productive than the current interface, but it will be  K > eye catching and software producers will start to produce software, that  G > requires it.  At least that is what habend when colour monitors were  I > new.  You do not become that more productive because you have a colour  K > monitor, but the software producers chosed to make interfaces that could  H > only be used with colour monitors, and people were forced to buy them. > F > Apple will have to make a user interface that is as eye catching as F > Microsoft, and such a user interface will require lots of resources. > K > People will get faster and faster network links, partly because video on  I > demand is on the way to become a consumer product.  Those faster links  H > will make it tempting to put HDTV on homepages, but that HDTV must be D > edited.  I would not want to do fancy video editing on a computer ( > restricted to less than 4GB of memory. > I > Apple will need to go to 64bit addresses on the desktop in a few years.   I  From what I read, very soon all Intel processors will be 64 bit.  Apple  / will get it, regardless of what it wants/needs.    --  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: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:13:37 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> Y Subject: Re: The processor wars, Part IV, =?iso-8859-1?Q?=93The?= turn to	=?iso-8859-1?Q? , Message-ID: <43D973AE.400B9E83@teksavvy.com>   Neil Rieck wrote:  > K > For all you chip heads out there, part 4/5 was posted today (2006-01-26). 9 > http://www.digitimes.com/bits_chips/a20060126PR201.html   : Thanks for providing the links as the new issues come out.   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jan 2006 00:17:01 -06002 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>3 Subject: Re: Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page ? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-ETyxK3HdTb7M@dave2_os2.home.ours>   F On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:00:29 UTC, "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> wrote:  J > Yup.  Human factors died when the masses got ahold of things. On the oneI > hand, there is now a lot more information available (note I did not say K > useable or correct information) but little good design.  Heck, I remember L > having to check out displays on black & white displays just to make sure aK > color blind person could read it.  I recently tried to set my PC to light J > text and dark backgrounds - and found that many, many things don't work.J > Not only web pages, but the fact that most people using PCs send mail in > HTML format.  C Agree with that. To be fair to users tho' - a lot of the time they  F don't know they are using HTML or that they _have_ an option. The men D from Windaz have decided for them... When I did all my mail on OS/2 D with Ultimail anything HTML normally went straight to the bin now I < rely on Thunderbird's Spam filter, which is quite effective.   --   Cheers - Dave W.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.053 ************************