1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 25 May 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 288       Contents:' Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working ' Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working ' Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working ' Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working ' Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working ' Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working " Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia" Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia" Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia" Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia" Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia Hobbyist licensing site broken? # Re: Hobbyist licensing site broken? # Re: Hobbyist licensing site broken? P Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says InquP Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says InquP Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says InquP Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says InquP Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says InquP Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says InquP Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says InquP Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on themarket  says Inqu Re: Results of my straw poll.  Re: Results of my straw poll.   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 18:52:28 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)0 Subject: Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working$ Message-ID: <e52a1c$f1a$1@online.de>  D In article <e51395$7b4$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de3 (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:    K > What I want is: reject email to valid recipients if they come from a bad  H > client.  I can get this functionality.  However, I can get it only if J > RELAY is enabled.  OK, if the good-clients list contains nothing on the J > internet, then no-one can misuse my relay, but since this functionality H > has nothing to do with relaying, it seems illogical to have to enable 
 > RELAY.    C Of course, RELAY is set in TCPIP and the setting stored "somewhere" I (i.e. not in a file normally edited by hand).  The good-clients stuff is  I in SMTP.CONFIG.  If one uses the anti-spam stuff as described, then some  H problem---accidentally deleting the file, disk-access problem making it B unavailable---leaves an open relay.  (Note that this file is read F whenever a message is received, so it's not enough for it to be there ? when SMTP starts up.  This is good for tests, but it means the  ; functionality depends on the file being always accessible.)    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:35:05 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 0 Subject: Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working, Message-ID: <4474C371.B216E563@teksavvy.com>  / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: E > Of course, RELAY is set in TCPIP and the setting stored "somewhere" J > (i.e. not in a file normally edited by hand).  The good-clients stuff isJ > in SMTP.CONFIG.  If one uses the anti-spam stuff as described, then someI > problem---accidentally deleting the file, disk-access problem making it & > unavailable---leaves an open relay.     F You can use proper file security to ensure the smtp.config file is notD deleted. Same as preventing the TCPIP*.DATA files in SYS$SYSTEM from being deleted.   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 21:41:07 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)0 Subject: Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working$ Message-ID: <e52jtj$291$1@online.de>  I After much experimenting, I conclude this is the algorithm used by TCPIP   anti-spam features:   : bad clients are rejected IF _ANY_ GOOD CLIENTS ARE DEFINEDF  (unless a good-client match is more specific than a bad-client match): if sender in good-clients list, "helo" welcomes a "friend" if not rejected, then    local mail always delivered )   if NORELAY relayed mail never delivered 
   if RELAY:     mail not delivered if sender not in good-clients list,;     i.e. it IS relayed if sender in good-clients list OR if $     GOOD-CLIENTS LIST IS NOT DEFINED   Or, in more structured form:   IF good-clients list exists  THENF   IF sender not in bad-clients list or if there is no bad-clients list   THEN8     IF sender in good-clients list THEN welcome "friend"     IF mail is local     THEN       accept mail      ELSE       IF relay is configured
       THEN&         IF sender in good-clients list         THEN           relay mail         ELSE           reject mail 
         ENDIF 
       ELSE         reject mail        ENDIF 	     ENDIF    ELSE     reject mail    ENDIF  ELSE   IF mail is local   THENP       accept mail regardless of whether bad-clients list exist and what is in it   ELSE     IF relay is configured     THEN       relay mail     ELSE       reject mail 	     ENDIF    ENDIF  ENDIF   % This is the algorithm I would prefer:   G reject if sender is in bad-clients list unless there is a more specific '  match in an OPTIONAL good-clients list : if sender in good-clients list, "helo" welcomes a "friend" if not rejected, then    local mail always delivered )   if NORELAY relayed mail never delivered 
   if RELAY0     relay only if sender is in good-clients list6     it is NOT relayed if there is no good-clients listN     if one wants to relay everything, put 0.0.0.0 in the good-clients list      E In other words, to determine whether or not to reject the connection  F right away, I would not require a good-clients list.  It is necessary @ only if a client needs to be specified more exactly which would I otherwise be rejected.  On the other hand, if RELAY is turned on, then I  " would require a good-clients list.  G If RELAY is turned off, then I don't need a good-clients list unless I  H need to specify a client more exactly which would otherwise be rejected.D With the current system, I need at least a good-clients list with a G dummy entry (e.g. private network which doesn't exist on the LAN).  On  I the other hand, if I want to have relay switched on, then I am forced to   specify the good clients.   F Actually, there should be good-clients and bad-clients lists both for D reception and for relaying.  It is conceivable that I would want to H accept email from a certain address, but would not want that address to E use my machine as a relay.  With the current scheme, if I prevent an  C address from relaying then, assuming relaying is allowed at all, I  ) can't receive any mail from that address.    ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 17:33:29 -0500 (CDT) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)0 Subject: Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working2 Message-ID: <06052417332987_2020743C@antinode.org>  P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)  H > Actually, there should be good-clients and bad-clients lists both for F > reception and for relaying.  It is conceivable that I would want to J > accept email from a certain address, but would not want that address to G > use my machine as a relay.  With the current scheme, if I prevent an  E > address from relaying then, assuming relaying is allowed at all, I  + > can't receive any mail from that address.   E    That sounds wrong to me.  Absence from the bad-clients list should D allow incoming e-mail.  Perhaps presence on the good-clients list isF needed for relaying.  I don't know.  But then, what's Relay-Zones for?      SMS.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:32:41 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 0 Subject: Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working, Message-ID: <4474ED07.FA1C7CE1@teksavvy.com>   "Steven M. Schweda" wrote:G >    That sounds wrong to me.  Absence from the bad-clients list should F > allow incoming e-mail.  Perhaps presence on the good-clients list isH > needed for relaying.  I don't know.  But then, what's Relay-Zones for?  , Good clients: allowed to relay to the world.  @ Not on Good clients: allowed to relay only to the "relay zones".  . On Bad Clients: not allowed to send to anyone.  
 Typically:  0 Good Clients: generally your LAN's network mask./ Relay Zones: the domains/hosts within your LAN.      with  I Relay-Zones: pastry.chocolate.com, smtp.chocolate.com, cake.chocolate.com   F the SMTP server will allow someone in the world to send email to usersA on any of those 3 hosts. (aka: chef@pastry.chocolate.com  will be G accepted by smtp.chocolate.com who will then que it to be delivered via A SMTP to the node pastry.chocolate.com whose smtp server will then  deliver it to "chef".    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 01:20:45 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 0 Subject: Re: Bad-Clients: definitely not working, Message-ID: <44753E86.C9ED779D@teksavvy.com>  / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: F > OK, if I want to accept email from x but not allow him to relay, but? > allow relaying in general, then I need ANOTHER dummy list for H > Relay-Zones (in addition to the dummy list Good-Clients which might be+ > needed only so that Bad-Clients is read).   A Relay-List defines the local hosts that can receive mail from the F outside world via your SMTP server. YOu can define it to only your own> machine if you want. It isn't "dummy". Same with good-clients.  J > However, I want a specific address to be able to send me email, so I putJ > that in Good-Clients.  Then, if relay is enabled at all, he can relay to > the world.  = Yes, you have a very good point.  But you can also define the G bad-clients as separate network masks that don't include the good guy.  F Or you can Accept-Mail-From: to define email addresses you accept mailR from nop matter where they come from. and those guys do not gain relay provileges.     > defined as a dummy list,  F Don't think of it as "dummy list". DEfine it properly to have what you; want: your host's IP address would be the only good-client.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:24:27 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> + Subject: Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia , Message-ID: <4474C0F4.8ECC01F9@teksavvy.com>   Neil Rieck wrote: L > Like similar remarks about globalization, fat-cat execs promote the "worldJ > competiton" mantra for only one reason: they increase short term profits' > numbers to justify their own bonuses.  >  > They export jobs to:  > 1. circumvent local labor laws# > 2. circumvent local polution laws " > 3. circumvent local tax payments  H Yes. Correct. But that is the whole point of  competition.  Look at whenF Boeing was looking to relocate its corporate head offices. There was aG contest between 3 states/cities who who could subsidize Boeing the most B to have its head office in their city. Chicago won with bigger taxD breaks. This is unfair to other companies in chicago who have to payF higher taxes than Boeing.  But Boeing was highly desirable and broughtG additional revenus to the city (even if the tax rate is much lower than E for other companies) that wouldn't have happened if Boeing had chosen  Denver instead.   F Europe is also suffering from this in a more obvious way: european carC makers are building plants in "new" european countries (aka: former E eastern block nations) because the labour costs there are much lower, @ yet, due to the integration of europe, those products are freelyE distributed throughout europe because they are made in europe. Or the G more famous case of polish plumbers winning contracts in France because & they charge less than french plumbers.  G It is very hard for workers in a country who had acquired "rights" over = the years to willingly give up such rights in order to become % competitive with the new competitors.   G In terms of executive compensation, you are very right, especially at a C time where those very execs are asking workers to lower their costs B (aka: become more productive) otherwise they risk seeing jobs gotoD India. It is a very convenient threath those EXECs can make to forceD local employees to accept concessions. And very hypocrit that at theG same time they are asking employees to make concessions, they negotiate B very plush compensation increases. Note that Don Carty of AmericanF Airlines was forced to resign because the uniosn found out that he hadE just negotiated himself a "healthy" compensation increase at the same B time he was negotiating with unions for major wage concession fromH employees at a time where the airline in bad enough financial shape thatD Carty was threathening to go chapter 11 and void all union contracts, unless they accepted concessions right away.  H Hiring Julia Roberts for a hollywood movie pretty well garantees it willE be a blockbuster, and as a result, Roberts can negotiate high salary. G The problem is that companies like HP thought they could do the same by E hiring a flambopyant "star" candidate that had been very popular with E wall street casino analysts. Not surprisingly, Carly negotiated hefty + salary when she realised she was in demand.   F The real fault lies with the board who was dry of ideas and decided toF hire a "star candidates" even if that person wasn't right for the job.D This was corrected when they let her go and hired Hurd. Carly didn'tG accept the HP position for the challenge, she accepted it for the perks  and the glory.  > Compare this to Steve Jobs at Apple. He had been fired by someF incompetant accountant who led Apple into oblivion. It took quite someF convincing to get him back. He didn't come back for the money, he cameG back for the challenge of rescuing his company from oblivion. Under his F predecessor, Apple had waivered and have been unable to come up with aC multitasking  OS kernel. Jobs came back, put his foot down, set one $ direction and made it happen (OS-X).  D Jobs isn't at Apple because he is famous. He is famous because he is doing a good job at Apple.  F Carly was a HP because she was famous. She got infamous because of the terrible job she did at HP.   H I have no problem with an exec getting large compensation as a result osH turning a company around and bringning it back to success. (Gerstner/IBMD and Jobs/Apple come to mine).  I have a problem with execs who thinkH they are a hoollywood star and that there mere presence in a coprorationE will bring success  and so demand huge compensation without providing  any results.  C Consider how many companies required the hiring of large consulting D firms because hiring smaller cheaper cosnulting firms just wasn't inB vogue. This has now changed and the trendy thing is to hire indianM consulting firms (even if you could find cheaper consultants inside the USA).   A There are too many corporations who go by trend instead of making B decisions on their own. They read about a trend in a trade rag and+ decide they must implement it to look cool.   E The problem is that manu CEOs don't belong there because they are way E beyond their "Peter's principle" level of competance.  Capellas was a C prime example of the accountant put in that spot not because he was @ competant at that level, but because nobody else wanted the job.  F And while we can fault Microsoft for MANY things, its execs do provideH strong leadership. Gates decides MS is to go in a direction, and MS willF work on that direction until it gets it right enough that its productsG sell. (I think that the mobile/PDA market is a perfect example where MS H started with a pathetic WindowsCE and stuck with it long enough to get aC product that was competing against Palm and Symbian.  Gates doesn't G worry about next quarter's financials, he is very able to set long term  goals and see them through.   F (Although recent news have shows that MS has asked contractors to stopG working until July 1 to cut on expenses for this quarter, so perhaps MS C will have to be more careful about short term results from now on).    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:28:55 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> + Subject: Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia , Message-ID: <4474C1FF.B30CC433@teksavvy.com>   etmsreec@yahoo.co.uk wrote:  > 4 > Wonder how her politics match with Bob Palmer's?     > H > They also both screwed their respective companies into the ground.  HP > survived though. :o(  H Her first stint as CEO didn't. Lucent is being absorbed by Alcatel.  AndD remember that Carly sold off the real "HP" (now Agilent) to keep her' toys business (printers, cameras, PCs).   H Capellas and runned out of companies to work for. He was only marketableF at companies that nobody wanted to steer. Now that he's managed to getF someone to rescue Worldcom/MCI, he'll soon be out of a job there and IH suspect he'll be left with his token seat on the board at Cisco and likeD Palmer at AMD, hopefully will just enjoy the perks and not cause the company to go down.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:25:08 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> + Subject: Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia , Message-ID: <4474EB43.6032AC07@teksavvy.com>   Rick Jones wrote: G > FWIW the Agilent spin-off was initiated under the watch of Lew Platt.   F Thanks, didn't know that.  Is it correct to state that it was actually( performed/completed under Carly's helm ?   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 23:31:29 GMT % From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> + Subject: Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia 1 Message-ID: <l16dg.1064$py7.272@news.cpqcorp.net>   . JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote: > Rick Jones wrote: A >> FWIW the Agilent spin-off was initiated under the watch of Lew 	 >> Platt.   ? > Thanks, didn't know that.  Is it correct to state that it was 3 > actually performed/completed under Carly's helm ?   C How much was "performed" when I've no idea.  The Agilent IPO was in D November of 1999 per the history links off of http://www.hp.com/ The text version starts here:   B http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/histnfacts/timeline/hist_30s.html  8 and the Agilent spin-off is described very briefly here:  B http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/histnfacts/timeline/hist_90s.html  D I suspect if one were to search the press release archives one could5 find the specific dates of various public milestones.   
 rick jones  @ BTW, after the spin-off Agilent further shed parts of itself.  I5 suspect that perusing history links and PR links from 6 http://www.agilent.com/ would find the public details.   --  B No need to believe in either side, or any side. There is no cause.E There's only yourself. The belief is in your own precision.  - Jobert F these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)D feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 20:09:48 -0400 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> + Subject: Re: Carly Fiorina bio at wikipedia 9 Message-ID: <3B6dg.1740$%Z2.244009@news20.bellglobal.com>   ; "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message  & news:4474C0F4.8ECC01F9@teksavvy.com... > Neil Rieck wrote:  [...snip...] > J > Yes. Correct. But that is the whole point of  competition.  Look at whenH > Boeing was looking to relocate its corporate head offices. There was aI > contest between 3 states/cities who who could subsidize Boeing the most D > to have its head office in their city. Chicago won with bigger taxF > breaks. This is unfair to other companies in chicago who have to payH > higher taxes than Boeing.  But Boeing was highly desirable and broughtI > additional revenus to the city (even if the tax rate is much lower than G > for other companies) that wouldn't have happened if Boeing had chosen  > Denver instead.  >   I While it is true that people working at Boeing in Chicago will be paying  M city and state taxes, how is it that things have changed so badly (in Canada  M as well as the USA) that some corporations in Chicago will have to pay taxes  J while others will not. You can imagine this situation taken to ridiculous J extremes where companies would move around just to avoid paying taxes (or A receiving government subsidies as happens quite a bit in Canada).    > H > Europe is also suffering from this in a more obvious way: european carE > makers are building plants in "new" european countries (aka: former G > eastern block nations) because the labour costs there are much lower, B > yet, due to the integration of europe, those products are freelyG > distributed throughout europe because they are made in europe. Or the I > more famous case of polish plumbers winning contracts in France because ( > they charge less than french plumbers. >   J Europe is not suffering at all. While it is true that former iron curtain F countries currently have lower paid workers, those EEC countries must G operate as if they were part of a virtual country known as the "United  J States of Europe" and must abide by labor laws and pollution rules set by K the EEC. Failure to do so means your country will be kicked out of the EEC  K and it back to tariffs on products crossing the border. (since the days of  J the Early Rome or China, customs and excise (tariffs + duty) were used to 4 protect the advanced culture from the primitive one)       ###   E In a previous post you mentioned companies off-shoring work to avoid  M unionized workers. One of the more successful labor markets currently exists  M in Korea but unionized workers also exist in other places like Japan, France  M and Germany (all places with a higher standard of living). I am not aware of  H any labor movement in China but that country has a very low standard of J living. So using this as a metric, where would you like to live? Korea or  China?  
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.! http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:41:35 GMT , From: Steven Young <nonexistant@invalid.com>( Subject: Hobbyist licensing site broken?E Message-ID: <slrne79dnf.h6r.steve@S01060050bfec5d4e.ed.shawcable.net>      Hello,  E   I've been trying to get my hobbyist license off openvmshobbyist.com D for a few days now and I never get anything sent to me.  I was underC the impression it was generated manually, so I guess it's broken.   E Has anyone else noticed this? Any ideas on what I can do to get a new ! hobbyist license for my VMS box?    	   Thanks,    Steve.   (sdyoungATmirandaDOTorg)   ------------------------------    Date: 24 May 2006 15:40:22 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) , Subject: Re: Hobbyist licensing site broken?3 Message-ID: <CWt7dbR7Tq8e@eisner.encompasserve.org>   t In article <slrne79dnf.h6r.steve@S01060050bfec5d4e.ed.shawcable.net>, Steven Young <nonexistant@invalid.com> writes:  G >   I've been trying to get my hobbyist license off openvmshobbyist.com F > for a few days now and I never get anything sent to me.  I was underE > the impression it was generated manually, so I guess it's broken.   G > Has anyone else noticed this? Any ideas on what I can do to get a new # > hobbyist license for my VMS box?    @ I know David Cathay, keeper of the hobbyist site, is in far-away? New Hampshire this week at the VMS Bootcamp.  There is a chance + this might not be analyzed until next week.    ------------------------------    Date: 24 May 2006 20:04:05 -0700 From: davidc@montagar.com , Subject: Re: Hobbyist licensing site broken?B Message-ID: <1148526245.281412.90720@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>  H Yes, but the hotel and bootcamp have network access!  I'll look into it!   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 12:22:52 -0700  From: Tom <tom@kednos.com>Y Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says Inqu ) Message-ID: <op.s92lgeiypa1svv@hyrrokkin>   B On Wed, 24 May 2006 11:10:58 -0700, <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote:  1 > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:  > I >> Customers on PARisc will likely be able to go directly from PaRisc to=    >> 8086. > F > That will be fun, as they move their data from BE to LE formats! And* > many of the PHUX apps have LOTS of data. >  Can't it be run in BE?     -- =  E Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/    ------------------------------    Date: 24 May 2006 22:27:30 -02006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)Y Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says Inqu , Message-ID: <4474ddd2$1@news.langstoeger.at>  ` In article <kC2dg.1034$D77.765@news.cpqcorp.net>, Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com> writes:K >                                                   (I know I'm working to  H >make OpenVMS I64 an attractive target, if and when a customer needs to 7 >move from an OpenVMS VAX or an OpenVMS Alpha system.     M Needs to move away is clear as there is no newer/bigger system than a Marvel. L When to move away is unclear as there is still no Itanic application for us.L Not even Oracle (now planned for later this year, was planned for last year)N despite the application itself which needs Oracle Classic (9?) beside/beneath.N I hope we can wait that long for the Itanic version, but I see Solaris coming.  L And as our application still doesn't run with the TCPIP scalable kernel, theK end of support for V7.3-2 at the end of this year is a big road block, too!   N Hoff, I enjoy your work, but I can't understand your defending of bad timings.L Do you really accept so easily that yet another VMS customer is forced away?   Sigh   --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------    Date: 24 May 2006 15:52:08 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Y Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says Inqu 3 Message-ID: <QDSRCes5Ismv@eisner.encompasserve.org>   F In article <op.s92lgeiypa1svv@hyrrokkin>, Tom <tom@kednos.com> writes:D > On Wed, 24 May 2006 11:10:58 -0700, <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote: > 2 >> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: >>J >>> Customers on PARisc will likely be able to go directly from PaRisc to= > 	 >>> 8086.  >>G >> That will be fun, as they move their data from BE to LE formats! And + >> many of the PHUX apps have LOTS of data.  >> > Can't it be run in BE?  F    8086 is strickly LE.  I've heard rumors of a bi-endian Pentium, butG    no evidence of a bi-endian Pentium.  Even IA64 is only bi-endian for >    data addressing, instructions must be loaded little-endian.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 14:52:20 -0700  From: Tom <tom@kednos.com>Y Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says Inqu ) Message-ID: <op.s92sdifxpa1svv@hyrrokkin>   2 On Wed, 24 May 2006 13:52:08 -0700, Bob Koehler  =  0 <koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org> wrote:  I > In article <op.s92lgeiypa1svv@hyrrokkin>, Tom <tom@kednos.com> writes:=   E >> On Wed, 24 May 2006 11:10:58 -0700, <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote:  >>3 >>> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:  >>> I >>>> Customers on PARisc will likely be able to go directly from PaRisc =  to=3D  >>
 >>>> 8086. >>> I >>> That will be fun, as they move their data from BE to LE formats! And=   , >>> many of the PHUX apps have LOTS of data. >>>  >> Can't it be run in BE?  > I >    8086 is strickly LE.  I've heard rumors of a bi-endian Pentium, but=   I >    no evidence of a bi-endian Pentium.  Even IA64 is only bi-endian fo=  r @ >    data addressing, instructions must be loaded little-endian. >  Stratus runs it BE.      -- =  E Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 02:10:58 +0800  From: prep@prep.synonet.com Y Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says Inqu 0 Message-ID: <87d5e31efh.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>  / JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:   G > Customers on PARisc will likely be able to go directly from PaRisc to  > 8086.   D That will be fun, as they move their data from BE to LE formats! And) many of the PHUX apps have LOTS of data.     --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:37:52 GMT , From: Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com>Y Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says Inqu 1 Message-ID: <kC2dg.1034$D77.765@news.cpqcorp.net>    prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:1 > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:  > H >> Customers on PARisc will likely be able to go directly from PaRisc to >> 8086.  2    Discussions of endian-ness differences aside...  ?    The number of folks moving backwards almost thirty years in  7 technology is going to be vanishingly small, obviously.   H    I must assume the original reference was intended to be to the Intel D EM64T or to the AMD AMD64 platforms -- the Intel 8086 is an ancient F (circa 1978) 16-bit processor, and I can only assume the intent is to G refer to some version of the processor family that's (at least) twenty  I years newer than the 8086.  Even moving an application backwards from 64  E to 32 addressing and from quadword to longword data is comparatively  D more work than it's usually worth, after all, much less moving to a  16-bit box.   F    I'm sure that folks running OpenVMS Alpha or HP-UX PA-RISC will be H looking at various platforms -- and HP is working now and is continuing D to work to make a move to OpenVMS I64, to HP-UX on Integrity, or to H Linux on Integrity, an obvious, effective and economic target for these H customers; the easiest, cheapest and best move.  (I know I'm working to G make OpenVMS I64 an attractive target, if and when a customer needs to  I move from an OpenVMS VAX or an OpenVMS Alpha system.  There are a number  H of engineering folks working on current and newer software and hardware - platforms based on Intel Itanium, after all.)    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 17:23:32 -0400 2 From: Bob Willard <BobwBSGS@TrashThis.comcast.net>Y Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says Inqu : Message-ID: <UY2dnY07D45JU-nZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@comcast.com>   prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:1 > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:  >  > G >>Customers on PARisc will likely be able to go directly from PaRisc to  >>8086.  >  > F > That will be fun, as they move their data from BE to LE formats! And+ > many of the PHUX apps have LOTS of data.   >    That's HPUX, a/k/a HockeyPucks.  --   Cheers, Bob    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:38:33 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> Y Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on themarket  says Inqu + Message-ID: <4474C441.EA15D40@teksavvy.com>    prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:F > That will be fun, as they move their data from BE to LE formats! And* > many of the PHUX apps have LOTS of data.  B Consider that Apple is moving from big endian on PowerPC to LittenG endian on the 8086. And they have "Rosetta" that allows applications to # transparently deal with this issue.   F And when you look at databases, Shirley Oracle has tools to export theD databases in a text format and reload them in a format native to the target platform.    G And consider that applications that are multiplatform already have code G in them to allow to run on either endianness (eg: if it runs on Solaris  and HP-UX, it supports both).   B But yeah, some customers will definitely have problems with such aE migration. But in the end, they won't have a choice because they will ? have that problem on any competing platform they could move to.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:31:06 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> & Subject: Re: Results of my straw poll., Message-ID: <4474C282.2FD81E4D@teksavvy.com>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:D > anything.  The docs are, for the most part HTML and will be served > by a webserver.   C The problem is that the HTML docs are nowhere near as usable as the T printed manuals or Bookreader format (or prooperly built PDFs with bookmarks/index).   ------------------------------    Date: 24 May 2006 13:46:20 -0700- From: "Doug Phillips" <dphill46@netscape.net> & Subject: Re: Results of my straw poll.C Message-ID: <1148503580.916030.308000@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>    Bill Gunshannon wrote:E > In article <1148487073.250579.291150@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, 2 > 	"Doug Phillips" <dphill46@netscape.net> writes: > > Bill Gunshannon wrote:- > >> In article <L5Sbg.753$oA6.198@trnddc06>, ( > >> 	John Santos <john@egh.com> writes: > >> > Bill Gunshannon wrote:  > >> >> > >> > Plus, remember my saying I was going to put 7 CD drivesE > >> >> on the box?  It's not just VMS documentation I need to serve.  > >> >>  > >> >6 > >> > Who says you need 7 CD drives for the VMS docs? > >>H > >> I didn't say 7 for VMS.  The VMS docs are on two.  But I have otherI > >> docs to serve as well.  And I certainly don't want to have to put up . > >> more than one machine to do the same job. > >> > > I > > Have you had good luck with CD sharing? How many people do you expect G > > will need access to the same CD at the same time? My experience has J > > been that the number of unhappy system users increases proportionately: > > with the number of people having to share the same CD. > D > Doesn't anyone read these threads before posting?  I'm not sharingD > anything.  The docs are, for the most part HTML and will be servedC > by a webserver.  Now, how many people can simultaneously access a D > web server?  What is the likelihood they will all ask for the same  > page at exactly the same time? > E > As for sharing CD's.  I do it for installs in the lab all the time. G > I can usually do 6-8 machines at the same time using a shared CD with D > satisfactory performance.  Once you go beyond that you usually getI > hard timeouts before the performance actually drops off.  I would never K > recommend sharing CD's in a production environment.  If you need to share I > the data with more than one or two users it is much better to just copy   > it to disk and share the disk. >   D Sorry, I misunderstood. I read you to say that you were putting 7 CDG drives on a PC to provide documents that students would access (in HTML = and other standard document formats) to use for class work. I D speculated that you'd build an HTML menu or such to help them get to the documents.  = I don't know what you mean by the statement >>I'm not sharing  anything.<<   G Bandwidth, processor(s), memory and hard-disk would be shared, but that G shouldn't pose a problem. I'd say they'd be sharing access to the CD's, " too, and there could be a problem.  E Presumably, your documentation offerings will be of the type to which G individual students and classes don't otherwise have convenient access.  If not, what's the point?   E If the students in only one class are using the documents to do their D work, I guessed the likelihood of many of them accessing the same CD0 during some period of time would be pretty high.  G If they're viewing the same page(s), the contention (for head movement)  will be low.  F If different classes are accessing different areas of the documents onB a CD, contention will be high. Frequent timeouts and slow response0 times will dissuade them from using the service.  G If it were me, I'd load the most requested / most needed documents to a D hard-drive, and use 2 or 3 CD drives for special requests and sampleE offerings. I'd use my main web-page (menu) for announcements and give ? the students a "feedback" link where they could make requests & B suggestions. I'd also provide links to pertinent Internet residentF documentation (as Kerry Main and others have suggested). Just my $.02, constructive or not.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.288 ************************