Discussion:
OT: IBM to buy Sun
(too old to reply)
Tom Linden
2009-03-18 12:03:31 UTC
Permalink
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
--
PL/I for OpenVMS
www.kednos.com
Bill Pechter
2009-03-18 12:18:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
--
PL/I for OpenVMS
www.kednos.com
Only the strong survive. Sun's never managed to capitalize on the purchase
of Storage Tek et. al. and the opening up of Solaris as Open Source.

We'll see how the HP vs. IBM battle goes.

My money's on NetApp as being another target for someone.

Bill
--
--
Digital had it then. Don't you wish you could buy it now!
pechter-at-pechter.dyndns.org
never+ (Michael Roach)
2009-03-18 14:21:18 UTC
Permalink
TIME Magazine Person of the Year for 2006 Bill Pechter
Post by Bill Pechter
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
--
PL/I for OpenVMS
www.kednos.com
Only the strong survive. Sun's never managed to capitalize on the purchase
of Storage Tek et. al. and the opening up of Solaris as Open Source.
I'd always hoped that IBM would scrounge for spare change in their lobby
couches, buy SCO, and open UNIX.
--
A neighbor came to Nasrudin, asking to borrow his donkey. "It is out
on loan," the teacher replied. At that moment, the donkey brayed
loudly inside the stable. "But I can hear it bray, over there." "Whom
do you believe," asked Nasrudin, "me or a donkey?"
IanMiller
2009-03-18 14:47:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by never+ (Michael Roach)
TIME Magazine Person of the Year for 2006 Bill Pechter
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
--
PL/I for OpenVMS
www.kednos.com
Only the strong survive.  Sun's never managed to capitalize on the purchase
of Storage Tek et. al. and the opening up of Solaris as Open Source.
I'd always hoped that IBM would scrounge for spare change in their lobby
couches, buy SCO, and open UNIX.
--
A neighbor came to Nasrudin, asking to borrow his donkey.  "It is out
on loan," the teacher replied.  At that moment, the donkey brayed
loudly inside the stable.  "But I can hear it bray, over there."  "Whom
do you believe," asked Nasrudin, "me or a donkey?"
Another point of view is that Sun started this rumour to get a better
price from another buyer.
See http://seekingalpha.com/article/126581-ibm-interested-in-sun-a-flaming-red-herring

what have Sun got that is not opensource?
Richard B. Gilbert
2009-03-18 15:02:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by IanMiller
Post by never+ (Michael Roach)
TIME Magazine Person of the Year for 2006 Bill Pechter
Post by Bill Pechter
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
--
PL/I for OpenVMS
www.kednos.com
Only the strong survive. Sun's never managed to capitalize on the purchase
of Storage Tek et. al. and the opening up of Solaris as Open Source.
I'd always hoped that IBM would scrounge for spare change in their lobby
couches, buy SCO, and open UNIX.
--
A neighbor came to Nasrudin, asking to borrow his donkey. "It is out
on loan," the teacher replied. At that moment, the donkey brayed
loudly inside the stable. "But I can hear it bray, over there." "Whom
do you believe," asked Nasrudin, "me or a donkey?"
Another point of view is that Sun started this rumour to get a better
price from another buyer.
See http://seekingalpha.com/article/126581-ibm-interested-in-sun-a-flaming-red-herring
what have Sun got that is not opensource?
Know how?
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 00:51:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by IanMiller
what have Sun got that is not opensource?
Hardware sale (that the chip designs are opensource is not
so relevant for the business).

Software sale for those that either want support or
can not live with the open source license chosen.

Arne
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 00:49:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by never+ (Michael Roach)
TIME Magazine Person of the Year for 2006 Bill Pechter
Post by Bill Pechter
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
Only the strong survive. Sun's never managed to capitalize on the purchase
of Storage Tek et. al. and the opening up of Solaris as Open Source.
I'd always hoped that IBM would scrounge for spare change in their lobby
couches, buy SCO, and open UNIX.
I believe an american judge rules that Novell owns the Unix copyrights.

The trademark has been at Open Group for a long time now.

Arne
David J Dachtera
2009-03-19 01:29:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Pechter
Only the strong survive.
At the risk of starting an OT rant-fest, technically speaking, that's
not what Darwin said. Darwin said that those species best fit (most well
adapted) to their environment are likely to surivive. "Fittest" has been
misinterpreted as "most physically fit" rather than the original intent
of "most adaptively fit to the environment / circumstances". Arguably,
mammoths, dinosaurs, etc. were likely the "stongest" creatures of their
time, yet they perished when their environment no longer matched their
adaptations or otherwise became inhospitable.

That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP. Then, they'll once again have a more-or-less "corner"
on the Enterprise computing market.

If they then ported both to Power, imagine the possibilities...

My /IMAGE backups would be done before I get the tapes MOUNTed!

D.J.D.
Michael Kraemer
2009-03-19 02:20:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by David J Dachtera
That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP.
People suggesting IBM as a saviour for VMS seem to
forget what happened to OS/2.
Bill Gunshannon
2009-03-19 12:02:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by David J Dachtera
That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP.
People suggesting IBM as a saviour for VMS seem to
forget what happened to OS/2.
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.

bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
***@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Bob Eager
2009-03-19 12:16:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by David J Dachtera
That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP.
People suggesting IBM as a saviour for VMS seem to
forget what happened to OS/2.
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
But, after all, the required hardware was a *lot* cheaper.

(and I still use BOTH)
--
Bob Eager
Christopher
2009-03-19 17:28:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Eager
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by David J Dachtera
That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP.
People suggesting IBM as a saviour for VMS seem to
forget what happened to OS/2.
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
But, after all, the required hardware was a *lot* cheaper.
(and I still use BOTH)
--
Bob Eager
OpenVMS is *not* a Porsche. A bulldozer maybe. A hummer possibly.
Not a Porsche.
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 01:04:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
OpenVMS is *not* a Porsche. A bulldozer maybe. A hummer possibly.
Not a Porsche.
I would say Rolls Royce or Bentley.

Old quality and a unique style.

Arne
P. Sture
2009-04-10 20:26:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Vajhøj
Post by Christopher
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
OpenVMS is *not* a Porsche. A bulldozer maybe. A hummer possibly.
Not a Porsche.
I would say Rolls Royce or Bentley.
Old quality and a unique style.
Land Rover? Adaptable work horse, with many body and equipment options
and third party customizations available.
--
Paul Sture
Bill Gunshannon
2009-03-19 17:41:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Eager
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by David J Dachtera
That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP.
People suggesting IBM as a saviour for VMS seem to
forget what happened to OS/2.
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
But, after all, the required hardware was a *lot* cheaper.
So was the Yugo, compared to the Porsche. And they will both get you
from point A to point B, Which one would you rather take?
Post by Bob Eager
(and I still use BOTH)
What? A Yugo and a Porsche? :-)

bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
***@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Bob Eager
2009-03-19 17:52:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Bob Eager
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by David J Dachtera
That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP.
People suggesting IBM as a saviour for VMS seem to
forget what happened to OS/2.
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
But, after all, the required hardware was a *lot* cheaper.
So was the Yugo, compared to the Porsche. And they will both get you
from point A to point B, Which one would you rather take?
Post by Bob Eager
(and I still use BOTH)
What? A Yugo and a Porsche? :-)
Why not? The X interface still sucks compared to the OS/2 Workplace
Shell.

I'm used to using VMS at a command line anyway, so I access the VMS
boxes from an OS/2 terminal window!
--
Bob Eager
Bill Gunshannon
2009-03-20 13:41:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Eager
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Bob Eager
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by David J Dachtera
That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP.
People suggesting IBM as a saviour for VMS seem to
forget what happened to OS/2.
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
But, after all, the required hardware was a *lot* cheaper.
So was the Yugo, compared to the Porsche. And they will both get you
from point A to point B, Which one would you rather take?
Post by Bob Eager
(and I still use BOTH)
What? A Yugo and a Porsche? :-)
Why not? The X interface still sucks compared to the OS/2 Workplace
Shell.
Really? So, when did OS/2 add the ability to do remote display of
applications?
Post by Bob Eager
I'm used to using VMS at a command line anyway, so I access the VMS
boxes from an OS/2 terminal window!
So then, what real value does OS/2 bring to the picture? Heck, I could
do that from CM/M 2.2. :-)

bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
***@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
yyyc186
2009-03-20 18:50:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Eager
But, after all, the required hardware was a *lot* cheaper.
So was the Yugo, compared to the Porsche.  And they will both get you
from point A to point B,  Which one would you rather take?
Wellll...assuming you didn't have a rubber vaccum line "somewhere" on
the vehicle which decided to start leaking a Yugo would get you
there. If even one of the hundreds of rubber vaccum lines went bad
the thing would leave you walking.
Michael Kraemer
2009-03-19 12:29:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I'm not so familiar with cars (especially US ones),
so I guess in this analogy OS/2 would be the Porsche:
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
Bill Gunshannon
2009-03-19 17:44:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I'm not so familiar with cars (especially US ones),
Ummm... Neither of those is American.
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.

Porsche's are anything but lean. They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft. It had as much chance of success as Linux
does today.

bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
***@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Bob Eager
2009-03-19 17:52:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft.
In what way? Before you answer, remember that Microsoft were
co-developers.

OS/2 2.x was different, of course. But none of the new stuff mimicked
anything that MS had done.
--
Bob Eager
Bill Gunshannon
2009-03-20 13:46:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Eager
Post by Bill Gunshannon
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft.
In what way? Before you answer, remember that Microsoft were
co-developers.
Who backed out quickly when they saw that they were helping to develop
a product for someone else that would directly compete with their own.
And that competitor was IBM who actually had the power and drive to
push MS right out the door if they wanted to. (After all, if it weren't
for IBM, would MS ever have even existed?)
Post by Bob Eager
OS/2 2.x was different, of course. But none of the new stuff mimicked
anything that MS had done.
It looked the same. It performed the same functions. It ran the same
software. What is it they say about quacking like a duck?

bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
***@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Bob Eager
2009-03-20 14:19:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
It looked the same. It performed the same functions. It ran the same
software. What is it they say about quacking like a duck?
It looked nothing like Windows. Three years later, Windows 95 came out
and looked like OS/2.
--
Bob Eager
Michael Kraemer
2009-03-19 18:07:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Ummm... Neither of those is American.
OK. So it seems I know as little about cars as you know
about OS/2 (see below)
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.
It's not my fault that VMS is not as cool as Porsche.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Porsche's are anything but lean.
Almost as flat as my thinkpad running OS/2.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS.
Well, a Porsche is meant to impress people,
especially females. Can I do the same with VMS ?
Post by Bill Gunshannon
OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft.
It was meant to overcome the lame attempts of M$ to
create something that could be called an OS.
Most of what still is lame in OS/2 originates
from M$ (they were co-inventors until 2.x)
Bradford Hamilton
2009-03-19 22:51:21 UTC
Permalink
[...]
Post by Michael Kraemer
It's not my fault that VMS is not as cool as Porsche.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Porsche's are anything but lean.
Almost as flat as my thinkpad running OS/2.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS.
Well, a Porsche is meant to impress people,
especially females. Can I do the same with VMS ?
"Hey baby, want to check out my uptime???"
:-)
[...]
Bob Eager
2009-03-19 23:01:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bradford Hamilton
[...]
Post by Michael Kraemer
It's not my fault that VMS is not as cool as Porsche.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Porsche's are anything but lean.
Almost as flat as my thinkpad running OS/2.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS.
Well, a Porsche is meant to impress people,
especially females. Can I do the same with VMS ?
"Hey baby, want to check out my uptime???"
:-)
[...]
Actually, I wrote a nice little uptime class for OS/2. Objects in that
class just show an icon and a title which is the uptime. You can have
dozens of instances all over the screen if you want to show off!
--
Bob Eager
Michael Kraemer
2009-03-20 01:12:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bradford Hamilton
"Hey baby, want to check out my uptime???"
Well, in this context "uptime" is measured
in minutes rather than days or months.
Bradford Hamilton
2009-03-20 01:18:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bradford Hamilton
"Hey baby, want to check out my uptime???"
Well, in this context "uptime" is measured
in minutes rather than days or months.
How about, "VMS - when it absolutely, positively has to stay up."
or, "VMS - the Viagra of operating systems. (For uptimes lasting four or more
hours, see your doctor)"
:-)
Michael Kraemer
2009-03-20 03:17:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bradford Hamilton
How about, "VMS - when it absolutely, positively has to stay up."
or, "VMS - the Viagra of operating systems. (For uptimes lasting four or more
hours, see your doctor)"
:-)
VMS -
Viagra Management System
Viagra Medical Supply
... and so on and so forth ...
Richard Maher
2009-03-20 03:05:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
Well, in this context "uptime" is measured
in minutes rather than days or months.
Braggart!

Cheers Richard Maher
Michael Kraemer
2009-03-20 03:18:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Maher
Post by Michael Kraemer
Well, in this context "uptime" is measured
in minutes rather than days or months.
Braggart!
Yours is measured in seconds ?
P. Sture
2009-03-21 21:37:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Richard Maher
Post by Michael Kraemer
Well, in this context "uptime" is measured
in minutes rather than days or months.
Braggart!
Yours is measured in seconds ?
Oops Richard, you walked into that one!
--
Paul Sture
Richard Maher
2009-03-22 01:04:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by P. Sture
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Richard Maher
Post by Michael Kraemer
Well, in this context "uptime" is measured
in minutes rather than days or months.
Braggart!
Yours is measured in seconds ?
Oops Richard, you walked into that one!
--
Paul Sture
Hi Paul, Michael,

I guess there's just no getting past you guys is there? Or is
self-deprecation really that unexpected in the narcissistic frenzy that is
COV (well all of Usenet from that matter)?

You all must be a hoot at the pub. Next time bring a whiteboard with
magnetic chickens & eggs. See when the guy crescendos to "We were so poor,
there were fifteen of us and we all lived in a paper bag at the side of the
road!" he doesn't really mean it - honestly.

Having lived in Deutschland for 15 months I can understand Michael's wacky
"Das ist funny ja?" sense of humour, in the absence of somebody slapping
someone :-) But Paul what's up? You must have been in Switzerland too long?

Cheers Richard Maher

PS. I'm not slagging anyone off here; we loved our time in Munich, and if
there was an opportunity there I'd be back tomorrow! But when we lived on
NymphenburgerStrasse in Neuhausen we'd go to the English Cinema every now
and then; so too would many of the native German-speakers (who spoke English
better than me and didn't want the film dubbed.) It was certainly confusing
for us to sometimes be laughing amidst almost total silence and other times
have the rest of the theatre erupt into laughter while we were scratching
our heads. Having said that, Michael is undoubtedly Prussian and God only
knows what passes for humour up there ;-)
P. Sture
2009-03-22 23:09:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Maher
Hi Paul, Michael,
I guess there's just no getting past you guys is there? Or is
self-deprecation really that unexpected in the narcissistic frenzy that is
COV (well all of Usenet from that matter)?
You all must be a hoot at the pub. Next time bring a whiteboard with
magnetic chickens & eggs. See when the guy crescendos to "We were so poor,
there were fifteen of us and we all lived in a paper bag at the side of the
road!" he doesn't really mean it - honestly.
Having lived in Deutschland for 15 months I can understand Michael's wacky
"Das ist funny ja?" sense of humour, in the absence of somebody slapping
someone :-) But Paul what's up? You must have been in Switzerland too long?
Nah, 'twas just intended as a little leg pulling. Sorry that it read the
wrong way.
Post by Richard Maher
PS. I'm not slagging anyone off here; we loved our time in Munich, and if
there was an opportunity there I'd be back tomorrow! But when we lived on
NymphenburgerStrasse in Neuhausen we'd go to the English Cinema every now
and then; so too would many of the native German-speakers (who spoke English
better than me and didn't want the film dubbed.) It was certainly confusing
for us to sometimes be laughing amidst almost total silence and other times
have the rest of the theatre erupt into laughter while we were scratching
our heads. Having said that, Michael is undoubtedly Prussian and God only
knows what passes for humour up there ;-)
Many films are dubbed well, but some are downright awful. I was until
recently enjoying Warner Brothers cartoons going back as far as 1943
(interesting from a historical point of view) on one of the Italian
language channels here transmitted as dual language broadcasts (Italian
and English). They have unfortunately dropped the origional ENglish
version and the Italian version sounds more like someone reading the
news. They are can in no way be compared with the Mel Blanc version!
--
Paul Sture
Richard Maher
2009-03-24 06:38:06 UTC
Permalink
Hi Paul,
Post by P. Sture
Many films are dubbed well, but some are downright awful. I was until
recently enjoying Warner Brothers cartoons going back as far as 1943
(interesting from a historical point of view) on one of the Italian
language channels here transmitted as dual language broadcasts (Italian
and English). They have unfortunately dropped the origional ENglish
version and the Italian version sounds more like someone reading the
news. They are can in no way be compared with the Mel Blanc version!
I love Italy also (despite the fact that I grew up with and still know
a lot of Italians :-) but it's got to be the last place on earth still
broadcasting Benny Hill? They seemed to rely solely on the visual gags (not
that the dialogue was ever up to much) but I mention it here only so that
those that also stumble across it can spend the time to appreciate the
Italian Ladies who introduce it. IIRC, all they say is "Such a naughty boy"
but it's how they say it!

Back in Munich circa '96/'97 I have to admit to being somewhat perplexed to
see Hogan's Heroes get a guernsey. But what was quality TV, was the ski
report in the morning with the mountain-cam panaramas accompanied by that
nasal twanger thing that I think is played in the mouth? Something good to
get ready for work by. (And the fact that they still play '80s disco at the
mountain bars is fine by me.)

As far as cartoons go, I do miss the WB re-runs! Especially when contrasted
against the occult-delving, gender-bending, humourless crap that gets dished
out for kids by the national broadcaster here. Actually, the best thing
about Oz TV in general is that it is sooo bad that you hardly ever watch it,
and get on with something worthwhile instead. (not that COV is one of the
"wothwhile" alternatives :-)

But what the hell is going on with foul language and sex on TV these days?
Channel 4 (UK) used to be pretty full on but at least not until 9:30. Over
here they make sure to advertise all the sex and swearing *before* the
watershed. Then there's the radio and the "Had enough of premature
ejaculation?" ads :-( followed by Brittany Spears' "You all want to shag
me", and 3ft bus ads with Billy Connolly on them saying "Bugger!". Is it
just me or are any of you other frogs thinking the water's warmed-up a bit
lately? What next, a "I shagged a sheep and I liked eeah-it!" single lifted
from "The love that dare not bleat it's name" CD? I shudder to think what's
making the charts in Tasmania!
Post by P. Sture
--
Paul Sture
Sorry for a post totally devoid of VMS. (I don't do it very often)

Cheers Richard Maher

PS. I just noticed that I don't have your name down on the list; do you want
the Alpha version or the IA64 version?
P. Sture
2009-03-25 14:06:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Maher
Sorry for a post totally devoid of VMS. (I don't do it very often)
Cheers Richard Maher
PS. I just noticed that I don't have your name down on the list; do you want
the Alpha version or the IA64 version?
Put me down on the Alpha list please. I'll reply privately to the rest.
--
Paul Sture
JF Mezei
2009-03-20 18:38:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bradford Hamilton
"Hey baby, want to check out my uptime???"
Well, in this context "uptime" is measured
in minutes rather than days or months.
if vms were marketed:

VMS: when staying up more than 4 hours isn't considered an anomaly !
yyyc186
2009-03-20 19:25:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
VMS: when staying up more than 4 hours isn't considered an anomaly !
VMS: When your cluster stays up more than 4 years it's what was
planned.
Bill Gunshannon
2009-03-20 13:51:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Ummm... Neither of those is American.
OK. So it seems I know as little about cars as you know
about OS/2 (see below)
Oh, I think I know more about OS/2 than your think. :-)
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.
It's not my fault that VMS is not as cool as Porsche.
Lot's of people here think VMS is very cool.
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Porsche's are anything but lean.
Almost as flat as my thinkpad running OS/2.
Not sure what "flat" means. But especially today, Porsches are anything
but "lean". Now, the 356, that was lean.
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS.
Well, a Porsche is meant to impress people,
especially females. Can I do the same with VMS ?
I have never owned any sports car, especially my Porshes or
Alfa's for the purpose of impressing anyone. I owned them
based on their ability to perform, as sports cars.
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft.
It was meant to overcome the lame attempts of M$ to
create something that could be called an OS.
Most of what still is lame in OS/2 originates
from M$ (they were co-inventors until 2.x)
Yeah, and just look at how they took over the business from MS after they
split!! Even the power of IBM couldn't make OS/2 a market success.

bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
***@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing
2009-03-20 03:03:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I'm not so familiar with cars (especially US ones),
Ummm... Neither of those is American.
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.
Porsche's are anything but lean. They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft.
If by "lame attempt to mimic Microsoft" you mean "joint IBM/Microsoft attempt
to develop a superior Windows/DOS superset, which Microsoft lost interest in
after they hired Dave Cutler", then yeah.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
It had as much chance of success as Linux does today.
Enormous, you mean, with increasing deployments from handheld to
desktop to data center?

-- Alan
Bill Gunshannon
2009-03-20 13:55:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I'm not so familiar with cars (especially US ones),
Ummm... Neither of those is American.
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.
Porsche's are anything but lean. They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft.
If by "lame attempt to mimic Microsoft" you mean "joint IBM/Microsoft attempt
to develop a superior Windows/DOS superset, which Microsoft lost interest in
after they hired Dave Cutler", then yeah.
I think it much more likely they lost interest when they saw themselves
developing a competitor in the hands of the one company who likely could
knock their butts right out of the business.

And some people don't think Cutler is really god come back to earth.
Post by Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing
Post by Bill Gunshannon
It had as much chance of success as Linux does today.
Enormous, you mean, with increasing deployments from handheld to
desktop to data center?
I must have missed the announcement. When did Linux push MS out of the
market?

bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
***@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing
2009-03-21 02:40:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I'm not so familiar with cars (especially US ones),
Ummm... Neither of those is American.
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.
Porsche's are anything but lean. They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft.
If by "lame attempt to mimic Microsoft" you mean "joint IBM/Microsoft attempt
to develop a superior Windows/DOS superset, which Microsoft lost interest in
after they hired Dave Cutler", then yeah.
I think it much more likely they lost interest when they saw themselves
developing a competitor in the hands of the one company who likely could
knock their butts right out of the business.
And some people don't think Cutler is really god come back to earth.
Post by Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing
Post by Bill Gunshannon
It had as much chance of success as Linux does today.
Enormous, you mean, with increasing deployments from handheld to
desktop to data center?
I must have missed the announcement. When did Linux push MS out of the
market?
So "chance of success" you meant "chance to destroy MS". I misunderstood;
I'd say Linux has seriously undercut MS revenues and has been very successful
by any standard, but not that that it has been successful in destroying MS.

-- Alan
Bill Pechter
2009-03-20 09:44:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I'm not so familiar with cars (especially US ones),
Ummm... Neither of those is American.
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.
Porsche's are anything but lean. They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft. It had as much chance of success as Linux
does today.
Oh come on. A lame attempt to mimic Microsoft. Get real.

OS/2 was a solid attempt at a real OS for the PC. Microsoft was still
shipping WinNT 3.x when OS/2's Workplace shell blew it away in terms of
ease of use and simplicity.

I was with IBM when they were pushing Warp3 and later Warp4.
There was nothing out there that was as advanced.

They had X11, TCP/IP, NFS... they didn't "embrace and extend" the standards
they implemented them.

The only problem was they got their clock cleaned when the Microsoft Office
suite became the business standard and Microsoft walked away from the
Win32s "standard for compatibility."

Everytime Microsoft changed their API IBM had to go out and figure out how to
keep it working in OS/2.

Also, the resources required -- mainly memory -- had a higher footprint than
Win3.x and NT3.x.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Bill
--
--
Digital had it then. Don't you wish you could buy it now!
pechter-at-pechter.dyndns.org
Bill Gunshannon
2009-03-20 14:03:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Pechter
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I'm not so familiar with cars (especially US ones),
Ummm... Neither of those is American.
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.
Porsche's are anything but lean. They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft. It had as much chance of success as Linux
does today.
Oh come on. A lame attempt to mimic Microsoft. Get real.
OS/2 was a solid attempt at a real OS for the PC. Microsoft was still
shipping WinNT 3.x when OS/2's Workplace shell blew it away in terms of
ease of use and simplicity.
I was with IBM when they were pushing Warp3 and later Warp4.
There was nothing out there that was as advanced.
And yet, where are they today?
Post by Bill Pechter
They had X11, TCP/IP, NFS... they didn't "embrace and extend" the standards
they implemented them.
So did MS. Just because very few people did them, doesn't mean they
weren't available on Windows. I run DOS versions of TCP/IP done by
MS almost every day. X11 was not high on Windows list of interests
but that seemed to be because they spcifically did not see the value
in remote display adn were happy with their own way of doing things.
There were, however, third party X11 solutions dating back to MSDOS
days.
Post by Bill Pechter
The only problem was they got their clock cleaned when the Microsoft Office
suite became the business standard and Microsoft walked away from the
Win32s "standard for compatibility."
So what, IBM couldn't match them? It definitely had a foot in more
businesses doors than MS at that point in time.
Post by Bill Pechter
Everytime Microsoft changed their API IBM had to go out and figure out how to
keep it working in OS/2.
So, it wasn't really superior, it was following MS every step of the way,
which is what I said in the first place.
Post by Bill Pechter
Also, the resources required -- mainly memory -- had a higher footprint than
Win3.x and NT3.x.
And, given the cost of hardware at the time, not a sign of a better product.

So, what part of OS/2 wasn't better did I miss?

bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
***@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Bill Pechter
2009-03-21 03:33:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Bill Pechter
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I'm not so familiar with cars (especially US ones),
Ummm... Neither of those is American.
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.
Porsche's are anything but lean. They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft. It had as much chance of success as Linux
does today.
Oh come on. A lame attempt to mimic Microsoft. Get real.
OS/2 was a solid attempt at a real OS for the PC. Microsoft was still
shipping WinNT 3.x when OS/2's Workplace shell blew it away in terms of
ease of use and simplicity.
I was with IBM when they were pushing Warp3 and later Warp4.
There was nothing out there that was as advanced.
And yet, where are they today?
Post by Bill Pechter
They had X11, TCP/IP, NFS... they didn't "embrace and extend" the standards
they implemented them.
So did MS. Just because very few people did them, doesn't mean they
weren't available on Windows. I run DOS versions of TCP/IP done by
MS almost every day. X11 was not high on Windows list of interests
but that seemed to be because they spcifically did not see the value
in remote display adn were happy with their own way of doing things.
There were, however, third party X11 solutions dating back to MSDOS
days.
Post by Bill Pechter
The only problem was they got their clock cleaned when the Microsoft Office
suite became the business standard and Microsoft walked away from the
Win32s "standard for compatibility."
So what, IBM couldn't match them? It definitely had a foot in more
businesses doors than MS at that point in time.
It didn't matter when the IBM solution was a second rate Lotus Smartsuite
that was a lot better than the earlier one with Ami Pro.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Bill Pechter
Everytime Microsoft changed their API IBM had to go out and figure out how to
keep it working in OS/2.
So, it wasn't really superior, it was following MS every step of the way,
which is what I said in the first place.
Nope... MS defined the API for apps to run under both OS's and kept
it constantly changing to break compatibility.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Bill Pechter
Also, the resources required -- mainly memory -- had a higher footprint than
Win3.x and NT3.x.
And, given the cost of hardware at the time, not a sign of a better product.
So, what part of OS/2 wasn't better did I miss?
Built in internet support and browser when MS had none of the above.
Full TCP/IP support designed in.
Excellent terminal emulation over TCP/IP.

You have to actually drive the box to feel it.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Bill
--
--
Digital had it then. Don't you wish you could buy it now!
pechter-at-pechter.dyndns.org
yyyc186
2009-03-22 13:18:56 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 20, 10:33 pm,
Post by Bill Pechter
It didn't matter when the IBM solution was a second rate Lotus Smartsuite
that was a lot better than the earlier one with Ami Pro.
Smartsuite was and still is a minimum of a full 8 years in front of MS
Office, yes, even the 2007 puddle of feeces. There was no better word
processor to layout books and technical documentation. MS Word isn't
even fit for children to send letters home from summer camp with.
yyyc186
2009-03-20 19:11:23 UTC
Permalink
Porsche's are anything but lean.  They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS.  OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft.  It had as much chance of success as Linux
does today.
Oh contrare.

Linux will win the desktop, no two ways about it. One of the regional
managers for an off-shore firm I chatted with laughed like hell when I
told him that 6 months ago. He said there was no way MS Office would
ever get replaced anywhere. I told him most government bodies, and a
lot of corporations have already started the migration to Open
Document Format. I got a call from him a couple of weeks ago. His
company had just completed MS Access, Outlook, and Office from their
entire company. They now had projects to do it for other companies.
They hadn't taken Windows off the desktop yet, but it was only the
first phase of the project both internally and externally. Everybody
was being moved to OpenOffice, Mozilla or Opera, and either GMail or
Evolution. In short, the first phase of the project was to save their
clients money by removing the bulk of the MS support cost. Once the
end users had gotten comfortable with all of the OpenSource products,
they were going to come in one day and find their desktop now had
either SuSE or Ubuntu on it.

Linux will never win the back end. It is a pathetic hunk of sh*t for
reliable database work, as is _every_ form of Unix. That grid stuff
is not fault tolerant...Oracle has sufficiently proven that to the
industry with their RAC product that cannot survive even the tiniest
of faults.

Inside of two years MS will be little more than gaming systems
vendor. While OpenOffice has its quirks, it is more than adequate for
98% of the business uses. Evolution is quite close to being a
complete Outlook replacement right now. If you add in the fact there
virtually no evolution specific viruses, then it is way ahead.

We are in a global recession. MS is trying to sell Worsta...errr...I
mean Vista and force a bunch of hardware upgrades. Both SuSE and
Ubuntu have corporate stable desktop versions where updating and user
installations can be turned off. Each desktop can also be remotely
managed for upgrades, etc. Each OS will run on the hardware the
corporation already has. The millions paid for license compliances/
maintenance/support to MS is an easy "cut costs" MBA sell.

Yes, there will be a token few companies which are stupid enough to
pay for marketing sold by Gartner Group as "Industry Analysis" who
staunchly refuse to abandon ship, but as time goes by and MS is unable
to pay huge quantities of marketing dollars to Gartner, even those
companies will follow.

I don't know about the situation for your company or clients, but I
have one client in particular that spends well over $1mill/yr in
desktop license/upgrade/compliance direct costs and an untold amount
in outages cause by MS product failure/virus infection.

One very cool thing with a Linux desktop is you don't need to spend
hundreds of dollars on VT terminal emulation to access your OpenVMS
machine. If you need full access you can use xterm. If you install
the KDE front end, Konsole is almost perfect for VT100. There's a bug
with the NumLock key remapping right now, but should be fixed soon.
The "/" would map correctly if the entry program could save it. They
have to add some special quoting so it doesn't get swallowed up by the
parser which uses the "/" for some escape stuff.
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 01:07:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
And to think people here think I am the one who is anti-VMS.
Porsche's are anything but lean. They do perfoem well, but then,
depending on your criteria, so does VMS. OS/2 was a lame attempt
to mimic Microsoft. It had as much chance of success as Linux
does today.
OS/2 did not mimic anything MS since when OS/2 was originally
designed all MS had was DOS.

It failed.

By every indication Linux is a success.

Arne
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 01:03:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I'm not so familiar with cars (especially US ones),
Both Porsche and Yugo are european cars !
Post by Michael Kraemer
it's lean, fast, has an own distinctive GUI
and runs on my Thinkpad which I can take
with me anytime I want to.
I don't think that was his view.

Arne
yyyc186
2009-03-20 18:48:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
Wellll....at the time they killed it, OS/2 was way out in front of
Windows. Of course, that was right after they successfully ripped
most of the MS code out of OS/2...around Warp 4.5. It came pre-
bundled with the Lotus Smart Suite (at least I never bought a machine
that didn't come with both) and SmartSuite was a full decade ahead of
MS Office. Even today, WordPro is still a full decade ahead of MS
Word and WordPerfect. It's at least 8 years in front of OpenOffice.

IBM simply wasn't willing to fight for the turf. MS truly screwed IBM
too. The only way you could do driver or kernel development was to
use MSC 6.0, which had been out of production for several years. Yes,
IBM had Visual Age for C++ already on OS/2, but they didn't have all
of the source code required for driver and kernel development. Some
critical pieces existed only in object form and the objects would only
work with MSC 6.0. IBM was faced with having to reverse engineer the
objects to make them work with the existing OS/2 compilers.

Everybody bitched that MS gave driver development kits away for
Windows driver developers, but IBM charged lots of money. The truth
is (from those I've talked with who actually worked on OS/2) they
actually had to license all the stuff from MS.

I actually miss OS/2. I've had a lot of Linux distros on my desktop
as I follow the industry to Open Source and away from MS products, but
I haven't found one I liked as much as OS/2. I managed to use Ubuntu
for a few years. That "Just Works" slogan they had was quite a
stretch. I've lived through RPM hell with RPM based distros. Sadly,
I'm back to using SuSE. Ubuntu kept releasing kernel patches that
broke critical stuff for much of their installed base and never backed
them out.
Michael Kraemer
2009-03-20 21:38:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by yyyc186
I actually miss OS/2.
You can still buy it.
It's called eComStation which is wrapped around Warp 4.5
yyyc186
2009-03-22 13:14:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
I actually miss OS/2.  
You can still buy it.
It's called eComStation which is wrapped around Warp 4.5
I'm very familiar with eComStation. It was put out by a company with
even fewer ethics than upper management at EDS. I didn't buy from
them when I used OS/2 and certainly won't now.

They don't even have the source code for OS/2. They are reverse
engineering some hacks and trying to develop requested drivers with
the original driver kit.
Bill Pechter
2009-03-21 03:37:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by yyyc186
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
Wellll....at the time they killed it, OS/2 was way out in front of
Windows. Of course, that was right after they successfully ripped
most of the MS code out of OS/2...around Warp 4.5. It came pre-
bundled with the Lotus Smart Suite (at least I never bought a machine
that didn't come with both) and SmartSuite was a full decade ahead of
MS Office. Even today, WordPro is still a full decade ahead of MS
Word and WordPerfect. It's at least 8 years in front of OpenOffice.
I've used WordPro... it's nowhere near as nice and responsive as the
earlier AmiPro.

I did like Symphony...
Post by yyyc186
IBM simply wasn't willing to fight for the turf. MS truly screwed IBM
too. The only way you could do driver or kernel development was to
use MSC 6.0, which had been out of production for several years. Yes,
IBM had Visual Age for C++ already on OS/2, but they didn't have all
of the source code required for driver and kernel development. Some
critical pieces existed only in object form and the objects would only
work with MSC 6.0. IBM was faced with having to reverse engineer the
objects to make them work with the existing OS/2 compilers.
Everybody bitched that MS gave driver development kits away for
Windows driver developers, but IBM charged lots of money. The truth
is (from those I've talked with who actually worked on OS/2) they
actually had to license all the stuff from MS.
I actually miss OS/2. I've had a lot of Linux distros on my desktop
as I follow the industry to Open Source and away from MS products, but
I haven't found one I liked as much as OS/2. I managed to use Ubuntu
for a few years. That "Just Works" slogan they had was quite a
stretch. I've lived through RPM hell with RPM based distros. Sadly,
I'm back to using SuSE. Ubuntu kept releasing kernel patches that
broke critical stuff for much of their installed base and never backed
them out.
I'm running Ubuntu right now on this box... I haven't had a problem with
their updates lately. They went through a patch of wild updates.

I've been using RHEL at work and although I like Ubuntu, I may have to drift
back to CentOS5 or 4 on the desktop here to keep compatible.

Crossover Office lets me run the Lotus Notes. The problem is I need to go
MS Outlook and Office 2007 now. ugh.


Bill
--
--
Digital had it then. Don't you wish you could buy it now!
pechter-at-pechter.dyndns.org
yyyc186
2009-03-22 13:27:30 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 20, 10:37 pm,
Post by Bill Pechter
I've used WordPro... it's nowhere near as nice and responsive as the
earlier AmiPro.
I did like Symphony...
Response doesn't matter if the word processor is incapable of
completing the desired task. Wordpro's tabbed document divisions
solved a _lot_ of problems.

The new word processors are mostly written in Java these days. You
can kiss that responsiveness goodbye. The new Symphony has nothing to
do with the old symphony. It can open "some" Wordpro files, but not
many other formats. Resource-wise, "pig" doesn't begin to describe
it. They did impliment a much more complete support of Open Document
Format than any other word processor out there. OpenOffice hasn't
even come close to implementing "master document pages" yet...they
have some pieces in place, but nothing which actually works.
Post by Bill Pechter
I'm running Ubuntu right now on this box...  I haven't had a problem with
their updates lately.  They went through a patch of wild updates.
Cannonical left me and thousands of others high and dry with the last
kernel update before I gave up on it a couple months ago. Despite the
pitchforks and torches appearing in their support forum, they chose to
adopt the French Foreign Legion motto "March or Die". There was no
backout and no estimation of when they would have a fix. I had to
move to SuSE.
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 01:19:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by yyyc186
I actually miss OS/2. I've had a lot of Linux distros on my desktop
as I follow the industry to Open Source and away from MS products, but
I haven't found one I liked as much as OS/2. I managed to use Ubuntu
for a few years. That "Just Works" slogan they had was quite a
stretch. I've lived through RPM hell with RPM based distros. Sadly,
I'm back to using SuSE. Ubuntu kept releasing kernel patches that
broke critical stuff for much of their installed base and never backed
them out.
For a server type guy it should be Redhat or SUSE.

They prioritize stability and their current free editions
show what the commercial editions will have in the future.

Ubuntu wants to compete with Windows on getting on most
millions of home PC's.

Interesting if you are into open source ideological war
with MS.

But if I want Windows then I would buy it MS.

The third option is one of the BSD's. Not nearly as
hyped as Linux, but pretty good.

Arne
yyyc186
2009-03-23 14:48:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Vajhøj
For a server type guy it should be Redhat or SUSE.
They prioritize stability and their current free editions
show what the commercial editions will have in the future.
Redhat is about to be out of business now that they are in a "who can
spend the most money" game against Oracle. The outcome is pre-
determined.

Linux on the back end is failing. I'm seeing a lot of contract work
to port back end systems off linux.
Christopher
2009-03-25 21:39:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by yyyc186
Post by Arne Vajhøj
For a server type guy it should be Redhat or SUSE.
They prioritize stability and their current free editions
show what the commercial editions will have in the future.
Redhat is about to be out of business now that they are in a "who can
spend the most money" game against Oracle.  The outcome is pre-
determined.
Linux on the back end is failing.  I'm seeing a lot of contract work
to port back end systems off linux.
To what?
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 01:02:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by David J Dachtera
That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP.
People suggesting IBM as a saviour for VMS seem to
forget what happened to OS/2.
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I think the only point was that IBM do kill operating systems not
to imply any equivalence in capabilities.

Arne
Michael Kraemer
2009-03-23 08:26:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arne Vajhøj
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by David J Dachtera
That said, It's probably time to suggest that IBM also buy VMS and
Non-stop from HP.
People suggesting IBM as a saviour for VMS seem to
forget what happened to OS/2.
Comparing OS/2 to VMS is like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
I think the only point was that IBM do kill operating systems not
to imply any equivalence in capabilities.
Arne
Yep. In two ways.
VMS is at a stage where OS/2 was about 10 to 15 years ago.
Just inspect the discussions in the os2.* usenet groups.
Swap the respective product and company names and most
of those postings could appear in c.o.v w/o further notice.
I.e. about IBM's non-marketing and restricting the
product to certain niches and killing the product etc etc.
The truth is, that IBM indeed tried to market OS/2 in the
early 1990s. They had smart ads, retailers on their side
and so on. They burnt a lot of money, but finally failed
because M$s stranglehold was already too strong, the
trade press were against it and in general people
were already preoccupied with Windoze. You can't
"market" against the trend. And there were "minor"
showstoppers, OS/2 needed more resources (significant
at a time when RAM was expensive) and had much less
apps (no native "Word" when everybody asked for it etc.)

All that applies to VMS, and it might explain HP's policy.
Maybe they are smarter than most people here think,
i.e. they have learned IBM's lesson.
JF Mezei
2009-03-18 15:56:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape. IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?

What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in enterprise OS.
So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
Neil Rieck
2009-03-18 17:01:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape.  IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in enterprise OS.
 So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
HP must be interested in enterprise or they wouldn't have purchased
EDS. They just don't seem to be interested in OpenVMS.

Neil Rieck
eortheain
2009-03-18 17:43:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neil Rieck
HP must be interested in enterprise or they wouldn't have purchased
EDS. They just don't seem to be interested in OpenVMS.
Yes, but EDS is all services (i.e. consulting); they don't make or
sell things.
Christopher
2009-03-18 21:21:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by eortheain
Post by Neil Rieck
HP must be interested in enterprise or they wouldn't have purchased
EDS. They just don't seem to be interested in OpenVMS.
Yes, but EDS is all services (i.e. consulting); they don't make or
sell things.
That's not entirely true either. EDS will develop an application for
you if that's what you want them to do. They have done that for a
couple of a large companies already. Maybe many.
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 00:55:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher
Post by eortheain
Post by Neil Rieck
HP must be interested in enterprise or they wouldn't have purchased
EDS. They just don't seem to be interested in OpenVMS.
Yes, but EDS is all services (i.e. consulting); they don't make or
sell things.
That's not entirely true either. EDS will develop an application for
you if that's what you want them to do. They have done that for a
couple of a large companies already. Maybe many.
But most likely no OS'es.

Arne
yyyc186
2009-03-20 18:31:29 UTC
Permalink
HP is currently only interested in selling ink jet cartriges and
services provided by illegal aliens. EDS and GM are actually the root
of the current financial crisis. They were the first to pay Gartner
to market off-shoring so they could off-shore. GM's upper management,
having taken too many head shots falling on the bunny slopes only
looked at the cost savings on paper, not the consequences of it. They
never stopped to consider the fact that most of the people buying
their $70K SUVs were IT workers. When the IT workers lost their
income, they not only stopped buying SUVs, they stopped playing the
"flip this house" game and the real-estate bubble popped. The rest is
history.

Having had to work with some of the fine-fine off-shore talent being
provided to GM via some standards committees, I have to say that GM
doesn't have a prayer of cutting costs via technology. The senior
most person they provided with the interface team had absolutely zero
ability to do design work, yet he was better than the rest of the team
they had participating in the conference calls. When your primary
selection criteria is "are you willing to work 12 hours per day for
$10 per day?" the outcome is predetermined.
Post by Neil Rieck
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape.  IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in enterprise OS.
 So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
HP must be interested in enterprise or they wouldn't have purchased
EDS. They just don't seem to be interested in OpenVMS.
Neil Rieck
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 00:54:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neil Rieck
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in enterprise OS.
HP must be interested in enterprise or they wouldn't have purchased
EDS. They just don't seem to be interested in OpenVMS.
EDS does not AFAIK have an enterprise OS.

EDS and HP are interested in selling consulting hours.

Arne
Christopher
2009-03-18 21:20:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape.  IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in enterprise OS.
 So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
I wonder where people get that idea. HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.
Richard B. Gilbert
2009-03-18 21:34:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape. IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in enterprise OS.
So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
I wonder where people get that idea. HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.
HP has TWO Enterprise OSs! Of course they don't seem to know it. . . .
Marc Van Dyck
2009-03-18 21:57:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard B. Gilbert
Post by Christopher
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape. IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in enterprise OS.
So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
I wonder where people get that idea. HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.
HP has TWO Enterprise OSs! Of course they don't seem to know it. . . .
Three... HP-UX, OpenVMS, and NSK... Which one did you forget, hmmm ?
--
Marc Van Dyck
Richard B. Gilbert
2009-03-18 22:11:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marc Van Dyck
Post by Richard B. Gilbert
Post by Christopher
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape. IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in enterprise OS.
So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
I wonder where people get that idea. HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.
HP has TWO Enterprise OSs! Of course they don't seem to know it. . . .
Three... HP-UX, OpenVMS, and NSK... Which one did you forget, hmmm ?
NSK! I've never used it, never even encountered it. Is there some
reason why I should not forget it?
Jan-Erik Söderholm
2009-03-18 23:22:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard B. Gilbert
Post by Marc Van Dyck
Post by Richard B. Gilbert
Post by Christopher
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape. IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in
enterprise OS.
So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
I wonder where people get that idea. HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.
HP has TWO Enterprise OSs! Of course they don't seem to know it. . . .
Three... HP-UX, OpenVMS, and NSK... Which one did you forget, hmmm ?
NSK! I've never used it, never even encountered it. Is there some
reason why I should not forget it?
Maybe you should ask in comp.os.tandem. You'll probably
get an answer that you've seen before in some other newgroup... :-)
JF Mezei
2009-03-19 04:22:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard B. Gilbert
NSK! I've never used it, never even encountered it. Is there some
reason why I should not forget it?
NSK developmenmt in the United States will outlive that of VMS. And
those who use NSK are almost all high profile customers, not some hazy
rumour of some department in the military using VMS.
Christopher
2009-03-19 17:27:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
NSK!  I've never used it, never even encountered it.  Is there some
reason why I should not forget it?
NSK developmenmt in the United States will outlive that of VMS. And
those who use NSK are almost all high profile customers, not some hazy
rumour of some department in the military using VMS.
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/success-stories.html
John Smith (not the one @ HP)
2009-03-21 14:28:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
NSK! I've never used it, never even encountered it. Is there some
reason why I should not forget it?
NSK developmenmt in the United States will outlive that of VMS. And
those who use NSK are almost all high profile customers, not some hazy
rumour of some department in the military using VMS.
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/success-stories.html


Look at the copyright dates in each of these success stories. How many are
2007 or 2008?

How many of the older ones are companies currently thinking of moving off
VMS?
Main, Kerry
2009-03-21 19:32:21 UTC
Permalink
-----Original Message-----
Sent: March 21, 2009 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Info-vax] OT: IBM to buy Sun
news:2439039a-81c5-4d65-8ced-
Post by JF Mezei
NSK! I've never used it, never even encountered it. Is there some
reason why I should not forget it?
NSK developmenmt in the United States will outlive that of VMS. And
those who use NSK are almost all high profile customers, not some
hazy
Post by JF Mezei
rumour of some department in the military using VMS.
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/success-stories.html
Look at the copyright dates in each of these success stories. How many are
2007 or 2008?
How many of the older ones are companies currently thinking of moving off
VMS?
Here are some recent fairly recent video OpenVMS Integrity testimonials:

http://tinyurl.com/59uzls (American Idol US show text messaging runs on OpenVMS Integrity servers and blades)
Delivering mobile data - Acision uses HP OpenVMS running on HP Integrity servers & HP Blades to help deliver more than half of the world's text & multimedia messages & serve three quarters of all videomail users.,

http://tinyurl.com/6ad3uh
Powering global capital markets - See how Deutsche Börse, the largest financial exchange organization in the world, uses HP OpenVMS running on HP Integrity servers to keep their electronic markets up and running.,

http://tinyurl.com/56a3sr
Moving the markets on HP OpenVMS - Operating Australia's chief financial markets, the Australian Securities Exchange relies on HP OpenVMS to deliver products and services that play a major role in the economy down under.,

http://tinyurl.com/58hktx
http://h20195.www2.hp.com/V2/GetPDF.aspx/4AA0-8708ENW.pdf
"We have the biggest CD and DVD collection in the world. Many people travel great distances to shop here for recordings they cannot find anywhere else. With our Integrity-based OpenVMS environment, we are giving exceptional service to our customers, increasing sales and consolidating our outstanding position on the market." Rainer Schulte, IT manager, Saturn Electrohandels GmbH, Cologne, Germany

http://www.vista-control.com/itanium_success.htm
Windows to OpenVMS Integrity Migration for mission critical SCADA environment



Regards

Kerry Main
Senior Consultant
HP Services Canada
Voice: 613-254-8911
Fax: 613-591-4477
kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
(remove the DOT's and AT)

OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 00:56:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard B. Gilbert
Post by Marc Van Dyck
Post by Richard B. Gilbert
Post by Christopher
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape. IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in
enterprise OS.
So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
I wonder where people get that idea. HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.
HP has TWO Enterprise OSs! Of course they don't seem to know it. . . .
Three... HP-UX, OpenVMS, and NSK... Which one did you forget, hmmm ?
NSK! I've never used it, never even encountered it. Is there some
reason why I should not forget it?
If you need the features of Tandem/NSK/Himalaya, then your options
are rather limited.

Arne
Markus Döhr
2009-03-19 09:42:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marc Van Dyck
HP has TWO Enterprise OSs! Of course they don't seem to know it. . . .
Three... HP-UX, OpenVMS, and NSK... Which one did you forget, hmmm ?
I'd go for four:

MPE/ix (though very old) and mainframe-like

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Multi-Programming_Executive

and

http://www.hp.com/products1/evolution/e3000/mpeix/

;)
--
Markus
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 01:01:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Markus Döhr
Post by Marc Van Dyck
HP has TWO Enterprise OSs! Of course they don't seem to know it. . . .
Three... HP-UX, OpenVMS, and NSK... Which one did you forget, hmmm ?
MPE/ix (though very old) and mainframe-like
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Multi-Programming_Executive
and
http://www.hp.com/products1/evolution/e3000/mpeix/
But MPE is officially in maintenance only mode.

Which is close to officially dead.

Arne
yyyc186
2009-03-20 18:33:00 UTC
Permalink
I wonder where people get that idea.  HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.
except it has never been successful in the enterprise, unless you
count the industry reputations it has spawned:

HP = Hourly Patches

UX - when they actually finish that OS they'll put the rest of the
letters in the name
Richard B. Gilbert
2009-03-20 18:50:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by yyyc186
Post by Christopher
I wonder where people get that idea. HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.
except it has never been successful in the enterprise, unless you
HP = Hourly Patches
UX - when they actually finish that OS they'll put the rest of the
letters in the name
You forgot to include what it would be if Dave Packard's name had come
first! ;-)
Christopher
2009-03-23 12:48:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by yyyc186
I wonder where people get that idea.  HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.
except it has never been successful in the enterprise, unless you
HP = Hourly Patches
UX - when they actually finish that OS they'll put the rest of the
letters in the name
I'm not defending it, I'm just telling you the way it is.
John Smith (not the one @ HP)
2009-03-21 14:23:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape. IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
What is interesting is that HP doesn't seem interested in enterprise OS.
So that would leave only IBM in the fray. (Unless Cisco becomes
succesful with its servers).
I wonder where people get that idea. HP-UX is their enterprise OS.
Seems like it always has been.


HP's real enterprise OS is provided by Microsoft, based on dollar value of
sales.
P. Sture
2009-03-21 21:09:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Smith (not the one @ HP)
HP's real enterprise OS is provided by Microsoft, based on dollar value of
sales.
That has been the subject of many a discussion here - why let MS have
the profits for the OS when they have their own operating systems?

So they have in effect outsourced OS development and maintenance?
--
Paul Sture
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-25 02:08:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by P. Sture
Post by John Smith (not the one @ HP)
HP's real enterprise OS is provided by Microsoft, based on dollar value of
sales.
That has been the subject of many a discussion here - why let MS have
the profits for the OS when they have their own operating systems?
So they have in effect outsourced OS development and maintenance?
If it was a HP choice: yes.

But I find it more likely that the HP Windows boxes would
have been replaced with IBM or Dell Windows boxes than
HP-UX boxes.

Arne
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 00:52:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
IF this happens, it will definitely change the enterprise system
landscape. IBM will have to decide between AIX, Solaris and Linux, or
would it keep all 3 ?
My guess:
- phase out Solaris over 10 years
- phase out AIX over 20 years
- keep Linux

Arne
Neil Rieck
2009-03-18 16:59:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
--
PL/I for OpenVMSwww.kednos.com
Here is another news link:

http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/CDN/News.asp?sub=true&id=52454

Neil Rieck
Richard Maher
2009-03-20 03:29:05 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

So is NetBeans' future assured, or is it time to get the IMM team cranked up
on Eclipse for VMS? Maybe just port it over in their "spare time"? Could be
a couple of years and lots of license-payer dollars in it!

Cheers Richard Maher

PS. Anyone planning kicking-off a development witha JavaFX client?
Post by Tom Linden
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123735970806267921.html
--
PL/I for OpenVMS
www.kednos.com
Bill Gunshannon
2009-03-20 14:06:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Maher
Hi,
So is NetBeans' future assured, or is it time to get the IMM team cranked up
on Eclipse for VMS? Maybe just port it over in their "spare time"? Could be
a couple of years and lots of license-payer dollars in it!
Eclipse is Java. Won't it just run on VMS?

bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
***@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Richard Maher
2009-03-20 23:46:37 UTC
Permalink
Hi Bill,
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Richard Maher
Hi,
So is NetBeans' future assured, or is it time to get the IMM team cranked up
on Eclipse for VMS? Maybe just port it over in their "spare time"? Could be
a couple of years and lots of license-payer dollars in it!
Eclipse is Java. Won't it just run on VMS?
Dunno, never seen one; nice theory though!

Maybe there are versions out there with twenty developers triggering
recompilations as they type and hovering over various objects for a
properties list? (Maybe setting breakpoints, debugging?) I'd be interested
in seeing that! ("Distributed" NetBeans^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Eclipse perhaps? I
think the IMM team should should startup a project right now to find out.
Actually, I think it would be better (certainly cheaper in the long run) for
HP/VMS if they just paid themselves huge AIG-type "performance" bonuses and
fucked-off! There was "resignation", and what was the other option?)
Post by Bill Gunshannon
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Regards Richard Maher
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 01:22:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Maher
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Richard Maher
So is NetBeans' future assured, or is it time to get the IMM team cranked up
on Eclipse for VMS? Maybe just port it over in their "spare time"? Could
be
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Richard Maher
a couple of years and lots of license-payer dollars in it!
Eclipse is Java. Won't it just run on VMS?
Dunno, never seen one; nice theory though!
It will need a few SWT shareable images to be build.

But it should not be so hard.

It will be interfacing X and it already works with X on
a couple of nix'es.

Arne
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 01:12:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Richard Maher
So is NetBeans' future assured, or is it time to get the IMM team cranked up
on Eclipse for VMS? Maybe just port it over in their "spare time"? Could be
a couple of years and lots of license-payer dollars in it!
Eclipse is Java. Won't it just run on VMS?
No.

Eclipse does use Swing but SWT.

And SWT is not ported to VMS.

(SWT is a GUI library which has some native components,
which gives is a more native look and feel than Swing)

Arne
Arne Vajhøj
2009-03-23 01:09:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Maher
So is NetBeans' future assured,
My guess is that NetBeans has sufficient user base to survive.

And IBM would probably not consider a single IDE for Java desirable
long term.

Arne
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...