1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 10 Jun 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 321       Contents:' Re: Cost of used alphas vs 8086+charron ' Re: Cost of used alphas vs 8086+charron ' Re: Cost of used alphas vs 8086+charron ' Re: Cost of used alphas vs 8086+charron  Re: My Boot Camp trip report Re: My Boot Camp trip reportA Re: OT: IT glitch results in Cadbury chocolate glut  (SAP again!)  Re: Results of my straw poll.  Re: Results of my straw poll.  SIMH Vax with throttle  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:28:16 +0200 3 From: Wilm Boerhout <w5OLD.boerhout@PAINTplanet.nl> 0 Subject: Re: Cost of used alphas vs 8086+charron6 Message-ID: <448a7490$0$23689$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl>  # JF Mezei wrote on 10-6-2006 3:42...  > Just curious:  > I > If one were to pitch VMS to a new customer, would a used Alpha come out 1 > cheaper than a 64 bit 8086 with charron-alpha ?   H Currently, CHARON-AXP is targeted towards replacement of older Alpha's, C allowing the legacy applications to integrate with modern platform   technology.   F With the current state of the host platforms, DSxx performance is not G yet reachable. CHARON-VAX on "8086" has surpassed real VAX performance  = for some time now. Who knows what'll happen in a few years...   / For pricing, you'll have to talk to a reseller.    /Wilm    ------------------------------    Date: 10 Jun 2006 04:12:42 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 0 Subject: Re: Cost of used alphas vs 8086+charron3 Message-ID: <vC7gQhTLuryN@eisner.encompasserve.org>   l In article <448a7490$0$23689$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl>, Wilm Boerhout <w5OLD.boerhout@PAINTplanet.nl> writes:  H > With the current state of the host platforms, DSxx performance is not I > yet reachable. CHARON-VAX on "8086" has surpassed real VAX performance   > for some time now.  , How about CHARON-VAX performance on Alphas ?@ Which Alpha models will allow one to supercede VAX performance ?   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Jun 2006 07:25:51 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 0 Subject: Re: Cost of used alphas vs 8086+charron3 Message-ID: <yWqyd+PTZVM5@eisner.encompasserve.org>   l In article <448a9229$0$27107$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl>, Wilm Boerhout <w5OLD.boerhout@PAINTplanet.nl> writes:- > Larry Kilgallen wrote on 10-6-2006 11:12... o >> In article <448a7490$0$23689$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl>, Wilm Boerhout <w5OLD.boerhout@PAINTplanet.nl> writes:  >>  J >>> With the current state of the host platforms, DSxx performance is not K >>> yet reachable. CHARON-VAX on "8086" has surpassed real VAX performance   >>> for some time now. >>  / >> How about CHARON-VAX performance on Alphas ? C >> Which Alpha models will allow one to supercede VAX performance ?  > I > A GS1280, probably. See http://www.stanq.com/Marvel%20White%20Paper.pdf   D That surprises me, seeming to indicate that an "8086" is faster than& all but the highest performance Alpha.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:31:02 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 0 Subject: Re: Cost of used alphas vs 8086+charron9 Message-ID: <gY2dnbzyKaQinRbZnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d@libcom.com>    Larry Kilgallen wrote:n > In article <448a9229$0$27107$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl>, Wilm Boerhout <w5OLD.boerhout@PAINTplanet.nl> writes:. >> Larry Kilgallen wrote on 10-6-2006 11:12...p >>> In article <448a7490$0$23689$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl>, Wilm Boerhout <w5OLD.boerhout@PAINTplanet.nl> writes: >>> K >>>> With the current state of the host platforms, DSxx performance is not  L >>>> yet reachable. CHARON-VAX on "8086" has surpassed real VAX performance  >>>> for some time now. 0 >>> How about CHARON-VAX performance on Alphas ?D >>> Which Alpha models will allow one to supercede VAX performance ?J >> A GS1280, probably. See http://www.stanq.com/Marvel%20White%20Paper.pdf > F > That surprises me, seeming to indicate that an "8086" is faster than( > all but the highest performance Alpha.  . The slowest Alpha is much faster than an 8086!  " You're both being subverted by JF.  . Perhaps you wish to discuss x86-64, or AMD-64?   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:00:41 -0400 + From: Steve Matzura <number6@speakeasy.net> % Subject: Re: My Boot Camp trip report 8 Message-ID: <hljl82hgf4ta1603570b8jshv35qcccgoq@4ax.com>  A On 3 Jun 2006 00:25:31 -0700, "Sue" <susan_skonetski@hotmail.com>  wrote:, >Rob Eulenstein who was in the Colorado callG >center and now works in MSE did a week long Crash Dump analysis class.   D Rob has been instrumental (was, I should say, since I don't work forE JPMC any more) in tracking down a problem with a third-party piece of ? hardware and another of software which, when they interacted in B certain ways, crashed VMS 7.3 on a VAX 7610.  Previous versions ofC VMS, no problem; upgrade to 7.3 and we were in deep doo-doo.  I can A only imagine the thoroughness with which Rob delivered his topic.   C And what was this about a 17-year-old entereing VMS accounts?  What E else did this 17-year-old know about VMS?  Great to be indoctrinating A the young like that (<big brin>).  Keep it up!  That's our legacy # support squad we're training there!    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:00:41 -0400 + From: Steve Matzura <number6@speakeasy.net> % Subject: Re: My Boot Camp trip report 8 Message-ID: <h0kl82t2936bscporibn4ba4v9hmbn9j9p@4ax.com>  E On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 22:47:12 -0400, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>  wrote:  H >If you really want to know, then plan to attend next year.  That might H >even get me there.  Might supply the nerf bats to all who want to beat I >on you.  That might backfire and I might get the attention of the bats.  ? >  Guess I better make sure they are of the ultra soft variety.   A Excluding room, board, and transportation, what's the cost of the B session, and is there a discount if you're coming on your own, not+ afiliated with or sponsored by an employer?    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:25:29 +0200 = From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Markus_D=F6hr?= <wantbottom@t-online.de> J Subject: Re: OT: IT glitch results in Cadbury chocolate glut  (SAP again!)* Message-ID: <448AAC29.7050504@t-online.de>   JF mezei wrote:  [...]  > G > Good example of the "mission critical" nature of many IT systems that K > can cost a corporation much more money than the IT systems itself costed.  >  >  > D > Have there ever been a succesfull large scale SAP implementation ?  F I know a lot of them :) we ourselves use SAP worldwide although we're I not really that "large scale" (~ 1000 users). But there are though a lot  G of BIG installations including e. g. the RWE (a German energy producer  F running some ten thousand SAP users on z/OS), Audi, VW, the Lufthansa @ and more, all of them with multi-terrabyte databases and really < thousands of concurrent people hacking data into the system.  H Doing this job for > 12 years I can say that it's certainly possible to F implement SAP in really big environments. Out of my experience of SAP H adoptions the main cause for a failing implementation are in most cases H organizational issues, internal politics and only some very few cases a  technical one.  I SAP scales very well, both out and up, and the technology behind is from  ) an administrative point of view SUPERIOR.   C This is, however, true for the ABAP stack (ABAP is the programming  E language that drives the business logic) - when you come to the Java  9 stack, the story turns quite to the opposite site (IMHO).      --   Markus   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:18:51 +0200 ( From: Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer@gsi.de>& Subject: Re: Results of my straw poll./ Message-ID: <e6e69m$lqa$00$1@news.t-online.com>    Tom Linden schrieb: 
 > Michael, >   > So why did GSI give up on VMS? >  > Tom  >   # well, it isn't completely dead yet, 2 particle accelerator controls still run under VMS.: However, this isn't due to "quality" but rather due to theF complexity of that particular application grown over 20 or more years,; but the guys in charge are bailing out as fast as they can.   L As for the "rest" of our organization, i.e. us researchers, certainly it was5 a multitude of reasons, and it didn't happen at once, G as can be expected from a heterogeneous and individualistic population. F The first wave of defections (which included me and my workgroup then)4 came with the onslaught of the cheap RISC UNIX boxes9 around 1990/91. It wasn't only the good price/performance 5 ratio of the hardware, also the Unix OSes had matured L and were perfectly capable to satisfy the IT requirements of small to mediumC sized work groups. At least as good, in most cases even better than , a traditional VMS cluster in daily practice.  @ Add that VMS had quite some trouble to interact with a more openA world (shall I mention TCP/IP ?), and that the focus of software   development I quickly shifted to Unix. Let me cite the statement of the chief developer E of a 3rd party software heavily in use at our site, who shall remain   nameless for the sake of privacy:9 "All of the current development by the ... group (who are 8 not the only contributers to ..., but certainly the main ones) is on Unix." and:: "Traditionaly, VMS was famous for compatibility. It is our: experience that this is no longer true. We find that every9 new release of anything (e.g. Fortran compiler, C, socket 9 libraries, VMS itself) breaks something. We spend alot of @ time coping with this and it is getting increasingly difficult." (as of Oct-1994).   B Certainly alpha was able to counter the RISC attack, but much too  little, much too late.8 The first wave of alpha's weren't impressive at all, andC alpha systems ready for prime time, i.e. worth shelling out $$$$$$, D weren't ready until 1993, two or three years after competitors like  IBM/POWER or HP/PA. H By this time, the "window of opportunity" had closed and Unix took over  central  computing and services.   I Although alpha/VMS boxes might have been considered competitive later in   the mid-90s,D the continuing decay of DEC and the confusing messages under Palmer  didn't encourageC people, with a few exceptions, to bet their farm on that DEC thing.   D The death knell rang early 1998, with the Compaq takeover, which in  general was perceived E as the final collapse of the DEC universe (or what was left thereof). ? In consequence, an external IT review committee recommended to  + management to drop VMS and related products L in favour of Unix/Linux/Windoze, since they expected an accelerated decline.( History proved them right, in hindsight.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 05:35:33 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> & Subject: Re: Results of my straw poll.) Message-ID: <op.taxjxjdrzgicya@hyrrokkin>   I On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 03:18:51 -0700, Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer@gsi.de>  =    wrote:   > Tom Linden schrieb:  >> Michael, " >>  So why did GSI give up on VMS? >>  Tom  >> > % > well, it isn't completely dead yet, 4 > particle accelerator controls still run under VMS.< > However, this isn't due to "quality" but rather due to theI > complexity of that particular application grown over 20 or more years,=   = > but the guys in charge are bailing out as fast as they can.  > I > As for the "rest" of our organization, i.e. us researchers, certainly =  it  =    > was 7 > a multitude of reasons, and it didn't happen at once, I > as can be expected from a heterogeneous and individualistic population=  . I > The first wave of defections (which included me and my workgroup then)=   6 > came with the onslaught of the cheap RISC UNIX boxes; > around 1990/91. It wasn't only the good price/performance 7 > ratio of the hardware, also the Unix OSes had matured I > and were perfectly capable to satisfy the IT requirements of small to =   =   > mediumE > sized work groups. At least as good, in most cases even better than . > a traditional VMS cluster in daily practice. > B > Add that VMS had quite some trouble to interact with a more openE > world (shall I mention TCP/IP ?), and that the focus of software  =   
 > development I > quickly shifted to Unix. Let me cite the statement of the chief develo=  per I > of a 3rd party software heavily in use at our site, who shall remain  =   
 > nameless > for the sake of privacy:; > "All of the current development by the ... group (who are : > not the only contributers to ..., but certainly the main > ones) is on Unix." > and:< > "Traditionaly, VMS was famous for compatibility. It is our< > experience that this is no longer true. We find that every; > new release of anything (e.g. Fortran compiler, C, socket ; > libraries, VMS itself) breaks something. We spend alot of B > time coping with this and it is getting increasingly difficult." > (as of Oct-1994).  > F > Certainly alpha was able to counter the RISC attack, but much too  =   > little, much too late.: > The first wave of alpha's weren't impressive at all, andE > alpha systems ready for prime time, i.e. worth shelling out $$$$$$, H > weren't ready until 1993, two or three years after competitors like  =   > IBM/POWER or HP/PA. I > By this time, the "window of opportunity" had closed and Unix took ove=  r  =  	 > central  > computing and services.  > I > Although alpha/VMS boxes might have been considered competitive later =  in  =    > the mid-90s,H > the continuing decay of DEC and the confusing messages under Palmer  =   > didn't encourageE > people, with a few exceptions, to bet their farm on that DEC thing.  > H > The death knell rang early 1998, with the Compaq takeover, which in  =   > general was perceived G > as the final collapse of the DEC universe (or what was left thereof). C > In consequence, an external IT review committee recommended to  =   - > management to drop VMS and related products H > in favour of Unix/Linux/Windoze, since they expected an accelerated  =  
 > decline.* > History proved them right, in hindsight. > F To paraphrase Ortega y Gasset, it appears history repeated itself with the transition to Itanium    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:58:40 GMT + From: "Villy Madsen" <Villy.Madsen@shaw.ca>  Subject: SIMH Vax with throttle * Message-ID: <Q_Big.7236$IK3.1618@pd7tw1no>  0 The Version 3.6 throttle mod is now available at   http://68.150.97.212/simh/   or    www.members.shaw.ca/villy.madsen  < instructions can be found in VAX-T-001.zip (the old version)  = I have included all of the VAX and PDP-11 directories because H 1) All of the PDP-11 drivers have had the include statements modified so; that they will compile without the error being talked about : 2) I am too lazy to just strip the unmodified modules out.  A The vax module has some additional stuff in it for x86 alone that J speeds things up about 8-10%.  remove the ALT definition from the makefile if you don't want that.    Villy      Villy Madsen  www.members.shaw.ca/villy.madsen   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.321 ************************                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        +HF,HGZHw#5 B_Gr# #e$ABz9w搒ۅԂԕgU?aȐvvEaLܥ+,6mO^or1
1~ӯo_S	7E;pfgyk
o"82`#{Z6wŅle과/._MIPh`5q|]}s}<.+)<}N[oݴ4$7PK    pK4UUL	G      pf$sda.exe_i64_v821  f                                      co   o                     
      "           []lu>wGݕ0PPBɴ=`
Ve7]N343d&-r