1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 21 Mar 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 159       Contents:7 Re: Have you ever considered of mousing ambidextrously? 7 Re: Have you ever considered of mousing ambidextrously? : IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium> Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium> Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium> Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium> Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium> Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium> Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium> Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium( Re: simh on linux  bigger than 2gig disk  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:01:09 -0500 - From: "Jim Agnew" <brainwavesurfer@gmail.com> @ Subject: Re: Have you ever considered of mousing ambidextrously?I Message-ID: <a184d6630603201101g323e25b3wd73dff74fd5eda73@mail.gmail.com>   ( ------=_Part_1062_31746395.1142881269993, Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1+ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable  Content-Disposition: inline   K So?  I've been mousing with my left hand using my fingers to click and just ) simply leaving the mouse alone otherwise. L not a problem at all...  No need to download any software.. Lots of code ca= n 5 insert trojans w/o you knowing it into your product..    J.  F On 20 Mar 2006 07:55:37 -0800, WangQiang <WangQiangg@gmail.com> wrote: > H > I'm also a programmer, as working in front of computer day and day, myG > right hand is so tired and get some pain. So I tried to mouse in both G > hands. I find that it is really an efficient way to release pains. At E > first I switched the mouse buttons in windows control panel, but it H > taken me several steps to finish it, and I can't flip the cursor, so IH > made a utility. With it I can switch mouse buttons and flip the cursorI > immediately by pressing a hotkey. I gave it a name: "Ambidexter Mouse", 5 > do you want to have a try: www.ambidexter-mouse.com  > E > (Some people asked me, "Why does it take an executable of 1.3 MByte F > to draw two buttons and make one system call? I will say, I used theG > SoftwarePassport www.siliconrealms.com to add a shell for my product)  >  >   ( ------=_Part_1062_31746395.1142881269993+ Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 + Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable  Content-Disposition: inline   L So?&nbsp; I've been mousing with my left hand using my fingers to click and=L  just simply leaving the mouse alone otherwise.<br>not a problem at all...&=L nbsp; No need to download any software.. Lots of code can insert trojans w/=$ o you knowing it into your product..L <br><br>J.<br><br><div><span class=3D"gmail_quote">On 20 Mar 2006 07:55:37 =L -0800, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername">WangQiang</b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:Wa=L ngQiangg@gmail.com">WangQiangg@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote c=L lass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); ma=- rgin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> L I'm also a programmer, as working in front of computer day and day, my<br>r=L ight hand is so tired and get some pain. So I tried to mouse in both<br>han=L ds. I find that it is really an efficient way to release pains. At<br>first=>  I switched the mouse buttons in windows control panel, but itL <br>taken me several steps to finish it, and I can't flip the cursor, so I<=L br>made a utility. With it I can switch mouse buttons and flip the cursor<b=L r>immediately by pressing a hotkey. I gave it a name: &quot;Ambidexter Mous= e&quot;,L <br>do you want to have a try: <a href=3D"http://www.ambidexter-mouse.com">=L www.ambidexter-mouse.com</a><br><br>(Some people asked me, &quot;Why does i=L t take an executable of 1.3 MByte<br>to draw two buttons and make one syste= m call? I will say, I used theL <br>SoftwarePassport <a href=3D"http://www.siliconrealms.com">www.siliconre=J alms.com</a> to add a shell for my product)<br><br></blockquote></div><br>  * ------=_Part_1062_31746395.1142881269993--   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:51:18 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG@ Subject: Re: Have you ever considered of mousing ambidextrously?0 Message-ID: <00A52FB6.3547CE75@SendSpamHere.ORG>  n In article <1142870137.784163.261670@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, "WangQiang" <WangQiangg@gmail.com> writes: >  > G >I'm also a programmer, as working in front of computer day and day, my F >right hand is so tired and get some pain. So I tried to mouse in bothF >hands. I find that it is really an efficient way to release pains. AtD >first I switched the mouse buttons in windows control panel, but itG >taken me several steps to finish it, and I can't flip the cursor, so I G >made a utility. With it I can switch mouse buttons and flip the cursor H >immediately by pressing a hotkey. I gave it a name: "Ambidexter Mouse",4 >do you want to have a try: www.ambidexter-mouse.com > D >(Some people asked me, "Why does it take an executable of 1.3 MByteE >to draw two buttons and make one system call? I will say, I used the F >SoftwarePassport www.siliconrealms.com to add a shell for my product)  7 My Apple mouse is already ambidexterous, thank you.  :)  --  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: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:03:46 GMT 1 From: Keith Parris <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> C Subject: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium 2 Message-ID: <6FFTf.4987$xH2.4005@news.cpqcorp.net>  C IDC recently did a study surveying 501 members of their Enterprise  A Server Customer Panel, and generated a report entitled "Customer  F Perceptions on the Future of Itanium" (IDC #34842, January 2006). You < can view this report by going to http://hp.com/go/integrity/  I "IDC's research revealed positive attitudes in the marketplace regarding  I the Itanium platform, specifically around awareness, purchase intent and  E current customer satisfaction among IDC's Enterprise Server Customer  I Panel," said Matthew Eastwood, program vice president, Enterprise Server  F Research, IDC. "Strong perception and awareness is a testament to the E brand that Intel and HP have established. This foundation provides a  @ solid basis for the Itanium Solutions Alliance to build broader B understanding among IT buyers and encourage new customers and new   partners to join the ecosystem."   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:28:24 -0500 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>G Subject: Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium = Message-ID: <2ZOdncFi_vYUsYLZRVn-uQ@metrocastcablevision.com>    Keith Parris wrote: E > IDC recently did a study surveying 501 members of their Enterprise  C > Server Customer Panel, and generated a report entitled "Customer  H > Perceptions on the Future of Itanium" (IDC #34842, January 2006). You > > can view this report by going to http://hp.com/go/integrity/ > K > "IDC's research revealed positive attitudes in the marketplace regarding  K > the Itanium platform, specifically around awareness, purchase intent and  G > current customer satisfaction among IDC's Enterprise Server Customer  K > Panel," said Matthew Eastwood, program vice president, Enterprise Server  H > Research, IDC. "Strong perception and awareness is a testament to the G > brand that Intel and HP have established. This foundation provides a  B > solid basis for the Itanium Solutions Alliance to build broader D > understanding among IT buyers and encourage new customers and new " > partners to join the ecosystem."  ? My, what glowing prose!  Of course, IDC has *always* had great  D expectations for Itanic, even after missing its projection of a $28 = billion Itanic market in 2004 by - er - rather close to 100%.   F But when you use the actual *numbers* which IDC projects in this same  study (more details at  H http://www.enterprisenetworksandservers.com/newsflash/art.php?451 ) the G future isn't quite so impressive:  $6.6 billion in total Itanic system  H sales in 2009, of which (if not too many current PA-RISC customers jump G ship before then) something like half should still (as it is today) be  F devoted to the PA-RISC replacement market with the rest (minus any HP F sales in other areas such as Windows or Alpha replacements) left over H for the other seven Itanic dwarves (or however many of them are by then C still clinging to the ship's sides with their feet trailing in the  E water) to divide amongst themselves.  And as the PA-RISC replacement  H market should then be nearing saturation, one might expect Itanic sales E growth to level off soon thereafter (so one should not read too much  @ into the vaunted 35% CAGR projected for the next three years, a A time-frame perhaps chosen rather carefully to avoid hitting that   leveling-off point).  H Still, I guess Itanic enthusiasts pretty much have to grab onto any ray G of hope they can find these days - especially after Montecito's recent  H unimpressive debut in TPC-C:  despite boasting a 33% larger L3 cache, a I 400% larger L2 cache (split between I and D now), and - wait for it... -  A dual (SoeMT) threads per core Montecito achieved less than a 25%  E per-core improvement in throughput over Madison II at the same clock  D rate (which according to Intel seems to be the only clock rate that F Montecito will ever have:  "Just wait for Montvale!", I guess, though E all that Montvale promises now for 2007 is what Montecito originally  H promised for last year:  a 2 GHz clock rate with Foxton increase to 2.2 : GHz under the right workloads, still in a 90 nm. process).  G And with HP's own projection that a 64-socket/128-core next-generation  G Superdome system will only hit 2.5M tpmC (it's possible that they were  H assuming availability of 2/2.2 GHz Montecitos in this projection, since < those were the specs provided in other portions of the same G presentation), the 3.2M tpmC score which POWER5 racked up a year and a  F half ago using only 64 cores seems completely secure until 2007:  IBM I won't even have to bother testing a full-boat 2.2 GHz (or perhaps faster  H as time goes by) POWER5+ system (which with only 16 cores just broke 1M G tpmC, achieving close to 4x the performance per core of a 64-processor  H Superdome Madison II system), and can just wait for their 4+ GHz POWER6 ! to clobber Montvale with in 2007.   H Not, of course, that Itanic's own siblings will be marking time for the E next year:  great things are expected of Conroe server systems later  G this year, especially for integer-intensive (i.e., typical commercial)  G workloads, and FB-DIMM technology should give their FSBs another lease  H on life at least in smaller subsystems (IBM's X-technology chipsets may H continue to extend the reach to larger systems, as they are doing today G - and Unisys has some impressive larger Xeon-based systems to offer as  B well).  AMD has its own enhancements planned to help counter this F renewed Intel x86 competition - but there's no indication that Itanic 8 has any substantive counter before 2008 at the earliest.  E So for at least the next couple of years (beyond which things become  I less clear, but with no strong suggestions of any major relative change)  I Itanic seems destined to be best-of-breed just about nowhere (I'd single  G out HPTC as a possible exception save that Opteron seems to be getting  F optional additional FP execution units next year, about when Montvale F might otherwise have started looking more like a leadership product). H Unless you count "running HP-UX (or VMS or NSK)" as its own significant  market segment, that is.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:34:25 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> G Subject: Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium , Message-ID: <441F2DEB.2D6157CC@teksavvy.com>   Keith Parris wrote:  > D > IDC recently did a study surveying 501 members of their Enterprise > Server Customer Panel,  . How sponsored this "survey" ???? Oh, lets see:  > > can view this report by going to http://hp.com/go/integrity/   Looks like HP sponsored it.   G Oh, and only those running a certain browser will be able to access the 1 PDF document because it contains an illformed URL   E http://h71028.www7.hp.com/ERC/downloads/Itanium Perceptions348421.pdf    It should be  G http://h71028.www7.hp.com/ERC/downloads/Itanium%20Perceptions348421.pdf     F The survey, done in Feb2006 still mentiones Montecito in mid year whenG it was announced it would not ship midyear but at least at end of 2006.   F The survey mentions Windows Longhorn, but does not mention Mircosoft'sE announcement that there would be limited software availability on the H IA64 version of Windows. (In fairness, at the very end, there is mentionE that Microsoft will be aiming Longhorn to ERP applications, but not a ? mention that Microsoft will not port all its software to IA64).       G After 5 years on the market, only 30% of HP customers have purchased at F least one IA64 box. (figure rises to 46% for HP-UX customers.). And HPE still intends to sell high end PARisc until end of 2008, low end till H end of 2007. Of course, VMS custoemrs are being shortchanged since AlphaA sales end in a few months even though Alpha is still pretty good.   E In that survey of 500 corporate IT folks, only 13% of non-HP customer   purchased at least one IA64 box.      I found this tidbit interesting:   ##C HP should be focused on assuring its customers on ease-of-migration H issues, suitability of Itanium for mission-critical workloads, and, most1 important, the viability of the Itanium platform.  ##  G So the survey admits that viability of IA64 is an issue. I am surprised G however that "mission critical workloads" is being mentioned.  However, C when you combine this with some of the wording elsewhere, perhaps a H picture emerges: in the statistics, they always mention "buying *a* IA64G server. So thsoe percentages would include large shops that just bought E a small IA64 thing to test/play with and haven't begun to do the real C migration of their real systems. This allows HP to claim that X% of F their fortune 500 customer having an IA64 box in house, but it doesn'tC mean that those customer have really begun to make use of that IA64 ' thing for the real processing in-house.   E So the quoted sentence might have been different had HP not sponsored H that survey. Perhaps "while many HP customers have purchase an IA64 box,G they remain to be convinced to begin to migrate their core applications  from PA Risc to IA64".     ##B HP's customers do intend to be fairly loyal when the time comes to migrate off their PA-Risc G servers. More than two-thirds of the PA-RISC customers interviewed plan 
 to migrate to the Itanium architecture  ##  F So, they are losing 33% of customer, and only 13% of non-customers areD interested in that IA64 thing. Seems to me that HP is heading in theA wrong direction and IA64 is not an asset but rather a liability.    G When Apple switched to 8086, it did so in part because it would help it 2 gain more market share and grow its customer base.    4 On the 33% HP will loose from its IA64 market share:3 	60% are going to industry standard servers. (8086) 0 	only 22% would choose an HP branded 8086 server 	22% remain undecided.  G So over half of the 33% of HP-UX customers not going to that IA64 thing E will quite being HP customers with only 44% still in play for HP (22% % sure to stay with HP, 22% undecided).     D The biggest reason cited for the 33% not planning to go to that IA64F thing: is poor opinion of IA64 and lack of faith in HP.  (here is thatB trust issue again... HP screwed MPE, VMS, Tru64 customers, changedH promises for HP-UX (clustering, intergrating True64 features etc), so HP" doesn't exactly garner much trust.    E Oh an in the fine print one requirement for SELECTING RESPONDANTS was G "Must have purchased a new server or significantly upgraded an existing $ server within the last 12-18 months"  A So, this excludes all IT guys who are holding on to their servers C because they wish to get some visibility on the future of that IA64 F thing. This survey is therefore biased because it selected respondantsE isntead of doing a proper survey of all IT managers who resonsability  over a large IT infrastructure.         E I think that HP posted this survey on its web site because it had the F expectation that customers would only read the first few pages and notF get down towards the end where the numbers are more raw and don't show such a great picture.        The REAL QUESTION TO ASK:   C If HP-UX is to lose 33% of its customers because of IA64 migration,   G What would happen if HP-UX were ported to the 8086 ?  Would that number , rever and show net growth for the platform ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 18:00:31 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> G Subject: Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium + Message-ID: <441F3408.E96EEEC@teksavvy.com>   D Interesting that the survey makes no specific mention of VMS or NSK.  G Perhaps the numbers were too dismal and HP paid IDC to conveniently not  publish those.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:17:48 GMT ( From: Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net>G Subject: Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium ? Message-ID: <wKGTf.240379$YJ4.158389@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>    Keith Parris wrote: E > IDC recently did a study surveying 501 members of their Enterprise  C > Server Customer Panel, and generated a report entitled "Customer  H > Perceptions on the Future of Itanium" (IDC #34842, January 2006). You > > can view this report by going to http://hp.com/go/integrity/  I At least we don't have to pay $1,500 to read it now. Interesting there's  * no mention of Alpha, VMS, or Tru-64 in it.   --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 18:53:18 -0500 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>G Subject: Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium = Message-ID: <XIidnStVFuvz3YLZRVn-jg@metrocastcablevision.com>    JF Mezei wrote:    ...   A   only those running a certain browser will be able to access the 3 > PDF document because it contains an illformed URL  > G > http://h71028.www7.hp.com/ERC/downloads/Itanium Perceptions348421.pdf   B Wow - HP was specifically targeting Firefox users (since I had no 5 problem downloading it with Firefox)?  I'm impressed!    ...   H > The survey, done in Feb2006 still mentiones Montecito in mid year whenI > it was announced it would not ship midyear but at least at end of 2006.   H No, Montecito is scheduled to ship around mid-year - though of course a I crippled vestige of what had been promised (which is now re-promised for  I Montvale, next year).  If it weren't expected until year's end or later,  F HP would not have been able to submit a Montecito TPC-C configuration  yet (such as it was).    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:49:22 -0600 @ From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>G Subject: Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium 6 Message-ID: <441F5BA2.2B1AA674@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>   Alan Greig wrote:  >  > Keith Parris wrote: F > > IDC recently did a study surveying 501 members of their EnterpriseD > > Server Customer Panel, and generated a report entitled "CustomerI > > Perceptions on the Future of Itanium" (IDC #34842, January 2006). You @ > > can view this report by going to http://hp.com/go/integrity/ > J > At least we don't have to pay $1,500 to read it now. Interesting there's, > no mention of Alpha, VMS, or Tru-64 in it.  3 As Gomer would say, "Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!"    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:01:03 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> G Subject: Re: IDC Insight: Customer Perceptions of the Future of Itanium , Message-ID: <441F5E4D.A9CB880D@teksavvy.com>   Bill Todd wrote:I > > http://h71028.www7.hp.com/ERC/downloads/Itanium Perceptions348421.pdf  > C > Wow - HP was specifically targeting Firefox users (since I had no 7 > problem downloading it with Firefox)?  I'm impressed!   F Nop. It was Microsoft which began by allowing its browser to translate@ invalid URL to valid ones, and its Frontapge software generatingG unescaped URLs, making it harder for those not on Microsoft browsers to H navigate. But with Microsoft crap having invaded the net, other browsersG (even Mosaic) now sport patches to fix bad URLs generated by people who G don't know the standards. In other woirds, other software are learnintg F to fix Microsoft's mistakes. But just because it workd doesn't make it right .Standards are standards.    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 03:10:22 GMT % From: Roger Ivie <rivie@ridgenet.net> 1 Subject: Re: simh on linux  bigger than 2gig disk 3 Message-ID: <slrne1urku.fma.rivie@stench.no.domain>   0 On 2006-03-20, fishzilla <efr@genrad.com> wrote:H > I have simh running on RedHad ES version 4 and Fedora core 2 emulating > a VAXserver3900.D > Problem I am having, is when trying to get simh to reconize a disk > bigger than 2gig.  > & > set rq1 rauser=2000     "this works" > . > set rq1 rauser=4000     "this does not work" > . > The message I get back is "Invalid argument" >  > ? > But running simh under WinXp with the above setting   set rq1  > rauser=4000   works fine.  >  > Any ides?   G Well, I'm no Linux guru and I've not spent quality time looking through F the sources for simh, but I do know that you have to do special things$ in Linux to use 64-bit file offsets.  B For one thing, the program must be compiled with _FILE_OFFSET_BITSG defined to be 64. This tells the linux headers that 64 bit file offsets  are in use.   G I've frankly never gotten along with Linux on this point. This is among  the reasons I use NetBSD.  --  
 roger ivie rivie@ridgenet.net   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.159 ************************