Discussion:
support ended .eq. "support extended"
(too old to reply)
Craig A. Berry
2013-06-10 15:22:39 UTC
Permalink
See:

<http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/press-release.html?id=1424702#.UbXsWZxWUSc>

which is a news release with the title: "HP Extends Support for OpenVMS through Year 2020".
Neil Rieck
2013-06-10 16:02:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Craig A. Berry
<http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/press-release.html?id=1424702#.UbXsWZxWUSc>
which is a news release with the title: "HP Extends Support for OpenVMS through Year 2020".
This notice still contains the quot "HP will not support OpenVMS on its HP Integrity i4 servers based on Intel Itanium processor 9500 series, commonly known as “Poulson.”"

which brings us to this news item today with the tile: "Windows NT grandaddy OpenVMS taken out back, single gunshot heard"

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/10/openvms_death_notice/

NSR
Jan-Erik Soderholm
2013-06-10 16:23:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neil Rieck
Post by Craig A. Berry
<http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/press-release.html?id=1424702#.UbXsWZxWUSc>
which is a news release with the title: "HP Extends Support for OpenVMS
through Year 2020".
Post by Neil Rieck
This notice still contains the quot "HP will not support OpenVMS on its
HP Integrity i4 servers based on Intel Itanium processor 9500 series,
commonly known as “Poulson.”"
which brings us to this news item today with the tile: "Windows NT
grandaddy OpenVMS taken out back, single gunshot heard"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/10/openvms_death_notice/
NSR
The TheReg article says "support will finally end in 2015".

The HP letter of today says "through at least the end of 2020"
and "with consideration for an extension".

Quite a difference.
Neil Rieck
2013-06-10 18:12:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Craig A. Berry
Post by Neil Rieck
Post by Craig A. Berry
<http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/press-release.html?id=1424702#.UbXsWZxWUSc>
which is a news release with the title: "HP Extends Support for OpenVMS
through Year 2020".
Post by Neil Rieck
This notice still contains the quot "HP will not support OpenVMS on its
HP Integrity i4 servers based on Intel Itanium processor 9500 series,
commonly known as “Poulson.”"
which brings us to this news item today with the tile: "Windows NT
grandaddy OpenVMS taken out back, single gunshot heard"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/10/openvms_death_notice/
NSR
The TheReg article says "support will finally end in 2015".
The HP letter of today says "through at least the end of 2020"
and "with consideration for an extension".
Quite a difference.
Thanks for pointing that out. We (in this office) were so shocked by the article's title (Windows NT grandaddy OpenVMS taken out back, single gunshot heard) that it caused a ruckus and I was not able to read any of it. One person here wondered if anyone still working at HP today knew that OpenVMS had anything to do with Windows-NT (probably not).

NSR
JF Mezei
2013-06-10 18:39:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
The HP letter of today says "through at least the end of 2020"
and "with consideration for an extension".
But end of sales for Tukwila is slated for 2015. Server upgrades until 2016.

This implies end of sales for VMS in 2015 since after than, there can be
no new VMS customers.
Jan-Erik Soderholm
2013-06-10 18:47:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
The HP letter of today says "through at least the end of 2020"
and "with consideration for an extension".
But end of sales for Tukwila is slated for 2015. Server upgrades until 2016.
This implies end of sales for VMS in 2015 since after than,
Hardly the largest problem for most here (that already runs VMS).
Post by JF Mezei
...there can be no new VMS customers.
End exactly what difference does that make compared
with the last 5 years? And besides, someone wanting
to run VMS on Alpha can still get an Alpha, and to
quite an attractive price too... :-)
JF Mezei
2013-06-10 19:08:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
End exactly what difference does that make compared
with the last 5 years? And besides, someone wanting
to run VMS on Alpha can still get an Alpha, and to
quite an attractive price too... :-)
A shop needing to add a node to their cluster after 2015 (that is 2
years from now BTW, not a very long time) will have to scour thorugh
used hardware sales.

and will havd a lot of trouble convincing VMS to give them a new VMS
license.

So, at the end of the day, users who had been postponing upgrades to get
Poulson based systems now have 2 years to purchase as many Tukwillas as
they will need to last until they have ported off VMS/IA64.
Marc Van Dyck
2013-06-10 19:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
End exactly what difference does that make compared
with the last 5 years? And besides, someone wanting
to run VMS on Alpha can still get an Alpha, and to
quite an attractive price too... :-)
A shop needing to add a node to their cluster after 2015 (that is 2
years from now BTW, not a very long time) will have to scour thorugh
used hardware sales.
and will havd a lot of trouble convincing VMS to give them a new VMS
license.
So, at the end of the day, users who had been postponing upgrades to get
Poulson based systems now have 2 years to purchase as many Tukwillas as
they will need to last until they have ported off VMS/IA64.
And what about running OpenVMS in a virtual machine on top of HP-UX
running on I4 iron ? Will that be supported ?
--
Marc Van Dyck
Stephen Hoffman
2013-06-10 20:10:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marc Van Dyck
And what about running OpenVMS in a virtual machine on top of HP-UX
running on I4 iron ? Will that be supported ?
Good question. I'd assume not. HP didn't even hint at those HP-UX
HP-VM i4-class configurations in their announcements, nor in the
OpenVMS roadmap.

The content of the customer letter and the roadmap do seem just a
little odd, though. If it had been intended as an EOL — as has clearly
been inferred by a number of folks, and whether correctly or otherwise
— the announcement omitted any discussions of available migration
paths, of HP migration services, and of HP's newer mission-critical
x86-64 server products. I would have expected that information to be
included in an operating system EOL.

All in all, very strange. Accordingly, I'd expect to see some more
information posted in the near future. What that might be, I don't
know.
--
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC
Johnny Billquist
2013-06-10 21:38:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Hoffman
Post by Marc Van Dyck
And what about running OpenVMS in a virtual machine on top of HP-UX
running on I4 iron ? Will that be supported ?
Good question. I'd assume not. HP didn't even hint at those HP-UX
HP-VM i4-class configurations in their announcements, nor in the OpenVMS
roadmap.
The content of the customer letter and the roadmap do seem just a little
odd, though. If it had been intended as an EOL — as has clearly been
inferred by a number of folks, and whether correctly or otherwise — the
announcement omitted any discussions of available migration paths, of HP
migration services, and of HP's newer mission-critical x86-64 server
products. I would have expected that information to be included in an
operating system EOL.
All in all, very strange. Accordingly, I'd expect to see some more
information posted in the near future. What that might be, I don't know.
The fact that HP really have not said much almost implies that they will
say something more sooner or later.

However, what they have said is that VMS will not be ported/qualified
for Poulson. Now, what does that mean? It means no new hardware
available two years from now. No new sales. Also, with no porting, and
assuming that customers are happy with Tukwila, can we expect much work
done on other improvements in VMS? Seems unlikely. After all, if HP
assumes customers are going to be happy with old hardware, why would
they not be equally happy with the current status of the software. So it
certainly looks like a moratorium on any new work on VMS. Left are
bugfixes and possibly some new device drivers (although unlikely).

Yes, this is not an official EOL for VMS. HP can wait with that until
2018 without any problems. However, I'd dare say it essentially is the
equivalent to an EOL. With no new hardware there will be preciously
little new sales. And thus, what else than an EOL could it be?

The one *possible* alternative I can see would be if HP decides to go
virtual. Stop Itanium hardware once and for all, and instead ship new
x86 hardware, and then start seriously promote VMS on virtual machines
instead. As I believe Alpha is a much easier architecture to deal with
on a virtual level than Itanium in that case, it could possibly be a
behind the doors return of the Alpha actually.
However, this would very much be mostly catering to existing customers,
as I don't see HP trying to sell this to new users. But it could imply
performance improvements because of hardware improvements over time,
without needing any VMS engineering to work on qualifying any new
hardware. They could just continue emulate existing Alpha hardware on
faster and faster machines.

We'll see...

Johnny
Arne Vajhøj
2013-06-12 01:04:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johnny Billquist
The one *possible* alternative I can see would be if HP decides to go
virtual. Stop Itanium hardware once and for all, and instead ship new
x86 hardware, and then start seriously promote VMS on virtual machines
instead. As I believe Alpha is a much easier architecture to deal with
on a virtual level than Itanium in that case, it could possibly be a
behind the doors return of the Alpha actually.
However, this would very much be mostly catering to existing customers,
as I don't see HP trying to sell this to new users. But it could imply
performance improvements because of hardware improvements over time,
without needing any VMS engineering to work on qualifying any new
hardware. They could just continue emulate existing Alpha hardware on
faster and faster machines.
Emulation is certainly possible. But There will be lots of
config certification issues. I can not imagine HP going down
that path.

Arne
Keith Parris
2013-07-17 01:00:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johnny Billquist
what they have said is that VMS will not be ported/qualified
for Poulson. Now, what does that mean? It means no new hardware
available two years from now. No new sales.
New Integrity i2 Server/Blade HW will be available for sale until at
least the end of 2015, and upgrades until at least the end of 2016. If
you need to buy i2 hardware longer than that, let HP know. Alphaserver
sales were extended as a result of customer input.

After new Integrity hardware is no longer available, you can still buy
refurbished Integrity hardware through HP Financial Services' HP Renew
program. I know of a customer who bought two fully-loaded GS-1280 32-CPU
systems a year ago January, 5 years after the "last-sale" date. There
will be a lot of HP-UX customers trading in their i2 servers for i4
servers and later Kittson-based servers. So there will be no shortage of
i2 servers for OpenVMS customers who need them.
j***@gmail.com
2013-06-10 22:50:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Hoffman
Good question. I'd assume not. HP didn't even hint at those HP-UX
HP-VM i4-class configurations in their announcements, nor in the
OpenVMS roadmap.
FWIW, there is this feedback gathering session at HP Connect 2013
in Las Vegas on June 11.

https://h30496.www3.hp.com/connect/sessionDetail.ww?SESSION_ID=4345

EJ
JF Mezei
2013-06-11 02:31:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Hoffman
The content of the customer letter and the roadmap do seem just a
little odd, though. If it had been intended as an EOL — as has clearly
been inferred by a number of folks, and whether correctly or otherwise
— the announcement omitted any discussions of available migration
paths, of HP migration services, and of HP's newer mission-critical
x86-64 server products. I would have expected that information to be
included in an operating system EOL.
What this announcement was: We have delayed the VMS EOL by 2 years by
extending Tukwila sales by 2 years.

So it clearly is not the formal EOL, but rather an announcement that the
EOL announcement is forthcoming within 24 months.
JF Mezei
2013-06-11 03:17:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Hoffman
The content of the customer letter and the roadmap do seem just a
little odd, though.
What bugs me is that they singled out VMS. In fact, the published letter
does confirm commitment to Poulson for both NSK and HPUX.

After so many years of promising to get VMS, NSK and HPUX all the way to
the end of IA64, it is puzzling that they would give up on their promise
for VMS so close to the end with only one more update needed.

More and more, my gut tells me that the decision to kill VMS was made
in 2009. They waited for 8.4 with Tukwila support to be far enough along
before telling engineering they were fired and being replaced with just
enough indian folks to package 8.4 and go on maintenance mode. Maybe
they never had any intentions of hiring enough indian manpower to
produce a new version on their own.


Perhaps the HPUX and NSK teams were made large enough to continue
development. This would explain why they can produce support for Poulson.

If I were an NSK customer, I am not sure I would even beleive a written
customer letter promising support for NSK unless it had a court's seal
on it.

Perhaps HP really does intend to proceed with "business as usual" and
never actually announce an EOL. They will scale back development on NSK
and HPUX as they did with VMS, and after Kittson, they'll just extent
systems sales indefinitely and still offer "stale" versions of NSK and
HPUX just so they don't have to announce an EOL.
Richard Maher
2013-06-11 10:45:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
What bugs me is that they singled out VMS. In fact, the published letter
does confirm commitment to Poulson for both NSK and HPUX.
I can only speak for NSK as that is a group I have followed.

They got off their arses an lobbied/worked for continuation.

Let's face it what was left of VMS engineering was a fat bloated carcass
that had done nothing for 10 years!

Go on! Ask your favorite VMS engineer what they did during the war and
they'll all tell you they milked it dry :-(

Cheers Richard Maher
JF Mezei
2013-06-11 18:14:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Maher
Let's face it what was left of VMS engineering was a fat bloated carcass
that had done nothing for 10 years!
They did a pilot to evaluate porting VMS to 8086. We'll never know how
far they went, unless someone is willing to pay an ex-engineer's HP
pension which they'll lose if they reveal that information. My bet is
they got to the DIR command.


After the port to IA64 was done, engineering was made much smaller. That
is why after 8.3, VMS developpement pretty much stalled. They did
provide support for new hardware such as those IA64 blades and new types
of disk array etc.

They can only do as much as their managers approve of projects.
MG
2013-06-11 15:56:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marc Van Dyck
And what about running OpenVMS in a virtual machine on top of HP-UX
running on I4 iron ? Will that be supported ?
HPVM hasn't (officially) supported VMS as a 'guest' since HP-UX B.11.31
September 2012, I believe. So, that's pretty much a dead end there.

- MG
Neil Rieck
2013-06-10 19:57:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
End exactly what difference does that make compared
with the last 5 years? And besides, someone wanting
to run VMS on Alpha can still get an Alpha, and to
quite an attractive price too... :-)
A shop needing to add a node to their cluster after 2015 (that is 2
years from now BTW, not a very long time) will have to scour thorugh
used hardware sales.
and will havd a lot of trouble convincing VMS to give them a new VMS
license.
So, at the end of the day, users who had been postponing upgrades to get
Poulson based systems now have 2 years to purchase as many Tukwillas as
they will need to last until they have ported off VMS/IA64.
Like the tick that just won't go away, I had been bugging my boss to consider spending money on moving from a 12-year-old AlphaServer-DS20e to a new Itanium box (I was hoping for Poulson). Well, now that the word is out on a VMS EOL I was only able (today) to convince him to authorize upgrading our memory from 3 gigs to 4).

NSR
David Froble
2013-06-10 22:09:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
The HP letter of today says "through at least the end of 2020"
and "with consideration for an extension".
But end of sales for Tukwila is slated for 2015. Server upgrades until 2016.
This implies end of sales for VMS in 2015 since after than,
Hardly the largest problem for most here (that already runs VMS).
Post by JF Mezei
...there can be no new VMS customers.
End exactly what difference does that make compared
with the last 5 years? And besides, someone wanting
to run VMS on Alpha can still get an Alpha, and to
quite an attractive price too... :-)
But, that is just the body twitching. There would not be any
possibility of any future. Yes, some will be able to hang on for some
time, but what's happening now is the end of the end. At least as far
as HP is concerned.
JF Mezei
2013-06-11 02:40:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Froble
But, that is just the body twitching. There would not be any
possibility of any future. Yes, some will be able to hang on for some
time, but what's happening now is the end of the end. At least as far
as HP is concerned.
One also needs to look at past context:

-IA64 development slowed down to stretch it life. Kittson moved from new
chip to a speed bump.

-VMS roadmap that was constantly made smaller and Richard Maher's IPSec
removed. The current one is tantamount to less than one man year's work.
(or one sunny afteroon for Hoff working on his laptop in backyard while
sipping cold drinks :-)

Basically, VMS customers who are stable will continue to be allowed to
donate money to HP in order to feel safe and secure because they will
have a support contract. (albeit with no deliverables)

VMS customers who do need updates to the OS to keep up with the rest of
the worls/internet probably instituted migrations long time ago and not
really touched by the recent news.

HP made it clear what its intentions were with VMS on day one with Scott
Stallard's memo. And they never really deviated from that policy.

The lack of future for Itanium , which became apparent in 2004, did not
help, but even if that IA64 thing had not turned out to be a dud, I am
not sure HP's handling of VMS would have been very different.
Keith Parris
2013-07-17 01:15:03 UTC
Permalink
...
Post by JF Mezei
-VMS roadmap that was constantly made smaller and Richard Maher's IPSec
removed.
The Roadmap does specifically mention Security updates, so maybe IPSEC
is not out of the realm of possibility.
Post by JF Mezei
Basically, VMS customers who are stable will continue to be allowed to
donate money to HP in order to feel safe and secure because they will
have a support contract. (albeit with no deliverables)
Support customers will continue to get what they pay for, including all
deliverables. Standard Support customers and those with Extended
Engineering Support or Mature Product Support with Sustaining
Engineering or Prior Version Support with Sustaining Engineering will
continue to get OpenVMS Engineering support, including bug fixes and ECO
kits. The Roadmap also talks about some new features, like 3PAR support.
And support customers at even the lowest levels (Mature Product Support
without Sustaining Engineering or Prior Version Support without
Sustaining Engineering) will continue to get technical support via
telephone/e-mail/chat and continued access to previous ECO kits. See
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/openvms_supportchart.html
Post by JF Mezei
VMS customers who do need updates to the OS to keep up with the rest of
the world/internet probably instituted migrations long time ago and not
really touched by the recent news.
No, many VMS customers who still need updates are still around, and they
can continue to get bug fixes and security updates from VMS Engineering
in the form of ECO kits.
JF Mezei
2013-07-21 19:48:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith Parris
Support customers will continue to get what they pay for, including all
deliverables.
Didn't support entitle customers to get new versions of VMS ? Since
there are no new version of VMS coming anymore, perhaps support pricing
should be adjusted to remove that component.
Paul Sture
2013-07-22 12:11:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Keith Parris
Support customers will continue to get what they pay for, including all
deliverables.
Didn't support entitle customers to get new versions of VMS ? Since
there are no new version of VMS coming anymore, perhaps support pricing
should be adjusted to remove that component.
I always thought it depended on the type of licence. IIRC the "right to
upgrade" cost more, but if you didn't take it up and then wanted to
upgrade you had to pay full price* for new versions.

* whatever "full price" means in this context.
--
Paul Sture
Jan-Erik Soderholm
2013-07-22 14:48:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Sture
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Keith Parris
Support customers will continue to get what they pay for, including all
deliverables.
Didn't support entitle customers to get new versions of VMS ? Since
there are no new version of VMS coming anymore, perhaps support pricing
should be adjusted to remove that component.
I always thought it depended on the type of licence. IIRC the "right to
upgrade" cost more, but if you didn't take it up and then wanted to
upgrade you had to pay full price* for new versions.
* whatever "full price" means in this context.
It also highly depends on your definition of "new version".

Phillip Helbig---undress to reply
2013-06-11 05:25:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Craig A. Berry
<http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/press-release.html?id=1424702#.UbXsWZxWUSc>
which is a news release with the title: "HP Extends Support for OpenVMS through Year 2020".
If it's on a roadmap, remember that Poulson and even Kittson were on the
roadmap just a few months ago. At the bottom of each roadmap page is
the "may change without notice" disclaimer.
Craig A. Berry
2013-06-11 12:10:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phillip Helbig---undress to reply
Post by Craig A. Berry
<http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/press-release.html?id=1424702#.UbXsWZxWUSc
which is a news release with the title: "HP Extends Support for OpenVMS
through Year 2020".
If it's on a roadmap, remember that Poulson and even Kittson were on the
roadmap just a few months ago. At the bottom of each roadmap page is
the "may change without notice" disclaimer.
Yes, of course. The point of my subject line was the irony of
announcing the end of support by way of claiming the extension of it.
As several folks have noted, the credibility of future support claims
is on the weak side given the recent track record.
Neil Rieck
2013-06-11 13:50:01 UTC
Permalink
I think the last paragraph of this article
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/10/openvms_death_notice/
says it all:

quote: HP never really promoted its acquisition and OpenVMS suffered from a lack of development compared to HP-UX, itself suffering from competition from Linux. It was only a matter of time, but it's a sad end. Many of its old-time fans, your correspondent included, cherished a hope HP would move it to x86-64 – but since development moved to India in 2009, OpenVMS has been living on borrowed time. Now, as HP signalled this month, it's run out.

comment: yep, promoting HP-UX while that business was slowing slipping away to competition from Linux was like throwing good money after bad.

When I heard why Tom Perkins left the board (wiring tapping by Patty Dunn, etc.) I suspected that the people managing HP were not cut from the same cloth as Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. Then HP seemed to get its second wind by bringing in a technology person, Mark Hurd. Then he was ejected for (now) seemingly trivial reasons at HP went back to it pre-Hurd ways.

Today, HP seems to be morphing into something closer commodity computer companies like Dell. At least IBM and Oracle-Sun appear to be working to making new head-way in IS/IT. At least, that is the way it appears to me.

NSR
V***@SendSpamHere.ORG
2013-06-11 15:36:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neil Rieck
I think the last paragraph of this article
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/10/openvms_death_notice/
quote: HP never really promoted its acquisition and OpenVMS suffered from a=
lack of development compared to HP-UX, itself suffering from competition f=
rom Linux. It was only a matter of time, but it's a sad end. Many of its ol=
d-time fans, your correspondent included, cherished a hope HP would move it=
to x86-64 =96 but since development moved to India in 2009, OpenVMS has be=
en living on borrowed time. Now, as HP signalled this month, it's run out.
=20
comment: yep, promoting HP-UX while that business was slowing slipping away=
to competition from Linux was like throwing good money after bad.
=20
When I heard why Tom Perkins left the board (wiring tapping by Patty Dunn, =
etc.) I suspected that the people managing HP were not cut from the same cl=
oth as Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. Then HP seemed to get its second wind=
by bringing in a technology person, Mark Hurd. Then he was ejected for (no=
w) seemingly trivial reasons at HP went back to it pre-Hurd ways.
The politically correct term here is "Hopelessly Pathetic."
Post by Neil Rieck
Today, HP seems to be morphing into something closer commodity computer com=
panies like Dell. At least IBM and Oracle-Sun appear to be working to makin=
g new head-way in IS/IT. At least, that is the way it appears to me.
Mediocrity: Why excel when mundane is ubiquitous?

Loading Image...
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
MG
2013-06-11 15:58:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by V***@SendSpamHere.ORG
Mediocrity: Why excel when mundane is ubiquitous?
http://www.biznology.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/mediocrity2.jpg
I always imagined the typical HP office to look a like in that gem of
Mike Judge.

- MG
V***@SendSpamHere.ORG
2013-06-11 19:35:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by MG
Post by V***@SendSpamHere.ORG
Mediocrity: Why excel when mundane is ubiquitous?
http://www.biznology.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/mediocrity2.jpg
I always imagined the typical HP office to look a like in that gem of
Mike Judge.
Loading Image...

Looks like "The Bob's" interviewed OpenVMS too.
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
JF Mezei
2013-06-11 18:20:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neil Rieck
When I heard why Tom Perkins left the board (wiring tapping by Patty Dunn, etc.) I suspected that the people managing HP were not cut from the same cloth as Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. Then HP seemed to get its second wind by bringing in a technology person, Mark Hurd. Then he was ejected for (now) seemingly trivial reasons at HP went back to it pre-Hurd ways.
"the trivial reason" was the excuse they needed t oust Hurd who has done
more damage to HP than people realise. When Whitman got in, she made
allusions to that damage without naming Hurd. His cuts to R&D was HUGE,
and not just to HP Labs. It was under Hurd that VMS engineering was cut
for instance, And he even cut R&D for Printers. Whitman complained that
the printing division hadn't developped a totally new printer/scanner in
ages because of that.

What is not clear to me is whether Whitman is stuck on a huge cargo ship
gog in the direction set by Hurd and having a hard time changing it, or
whether she agrees with it.

She is stuck with underperforming departments such as BCS, so it can be
fairly to just cut those quickly to reduce losses. But this will give HP
a bad image in enterprise, so that is a cost that perhaps Whitman is
underestimating.

The project Odyssey better yield something concrete real soon otherwise
it will become a running joke.
Bill Gunshannon
2013-06-11 18:59:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Neil Rieck
When I heard why Tom Perkins left the board (wiring tapping by Patty Dunn, etc.) I suspected that the people managing HP were not cut from the same cloth as Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. Then HP seemed to get its second wind by bringing in a technology person, Mark Hurd. Then he was ejected for (now) seemingly trivial reasons at HP went back to it pre-Hurd ways.
"the trivial reason" was the excuse they needed t oust Hurd who has done
more damage to HP than people realise. When Whitman got in, she made
allusions to that damage without naming Hurd. His cuts to R&D was HUGE,
and not just to HP Labs. It was under Hurd that VMS engineering was cut
for instance, And he even cut R&D for Printers.
Maybe he just had the vision to see that they were throwing money down
the crapper. Somebody has to make the hard decisions.
Post by JF Mezei
Whitman complained that
the printing division hadn't developped a totally new printer/scanner in
ages because of that.
Thet're printers for god's sake. Just how much "new" is really needed
to print the porn pictures you download from the web?
Post by JF Mezei
What is not clear to me is whether Whitman is stuck on a huge cargo ship
gog in the direction set by Hurd and having a hard time changing it, or
whether she agrees with it.
Or just doesn't have a clue.
Post by JF Mezei
She is stuck with underperforming departments such as BCS, so it can be
fairly to just cut those quickly to reduce losses.
You would recommend not making cuts and just flushing more and more
cash down the toilet?
Post by JF Mezei
But this will give HP
a bad image in enterprise, so that is a cost that perhaps Whitman is
underestimating.
HP's image has been in the same state for longer than I can remember.
Dumping money losers should actually improve their image. And when
you have no apparent direction, there are bound to be lots of money
losers.
Post by JF Mezei
The project Odyssey better yield something concrete real soon otherwise
it will become a running joke.
You mean like Itanic? What could be a bigger joke than that?

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>
Michael Kraemer
2013-06-11 22:41:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Thet're printers for god's sake. Just how much "new" is really needed
to print the porn pictures you download from the web?
Some might want it in 3D and ultrasensitive.
V***@SendSpamHere.ORG
2013-06-11 23:57:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Kraemer
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Thet're printers for god's sake. Just how much "new" is really needed
to print the porn pictures you download from the web?
Some might want it in 3D and ultrasensitive.
Considering the ridiculous prices for HP's printer consumables, I'd hate to
know what it might set one back to print out Chesty Morgan's trademarks on
an HP 3D printer.
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
Arne Vajhøj
2013-06-12 01:09:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Neil Rieck
When I heard why Tom Perkins left the board (wiring tapping by Patty Dunn, etc.) I suspected that the people managing HP were not cut from the same cloth as Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. Then HP seemed to get its second wind by bringing in a technology person, Mark Hurd. Then he was ejected for (now) seemingly trivial reasons at HP went back to it pre-Hurd ways.
"the trivial reason" was the excuse they needed t oust Hurd who has done
more damage to HP than people realise. When Whitman got in, she made
allusions to that damage without naming Hurd. His cuts to R&D was HUGE,
and not just to HP Labs. It was under Hurd that VMS engineering was cut
for instance, And he even cut R&D for Printers.
Maybe he just had the vision to see that they were throwing money down
the crapper. Somebody has to make the hard decisions.
Stop investing money in dead ends is smart.

But not investing money in something with a future is not smart.

Hurd reduced R&D - he did not move R&D around.
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by JF Mezei
Whitman complained that
the printing division hadn't developped a totally new printer/scanner in
ages because of that.
Thet're printers for god's sake. Just how much "new" is really needed
to print the porn pictures you download from the web?
Printers is a B2C product and need more R&D than B2B products like
servers.

Arne
V***@SendSpamHere.ORG
2013-06-11 19:41:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Post by Neil Rieck
When I heard why Tom Perkins left the board (wiring tapping by Patty Dunn, etc.) I suspected that the people managing HP were not cut from the same cloth as Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. Then HP seemed to get its second wind by bringing in a technolog
"the trivial reason" was the excuse they needed t oust Hurd who has done
more damage to HP than people realise. When Whitman got in, she made
allusions to that damage without naming Hurd. His cuts to R&D was HUGE,
and not just to HP Labs. It was under Hurd that VMS engineering was cut
for instance, And he even cut R&D for Printers. Whitman complained that
the printing division hadn't developped a totally new printer/scanner in
ages because of that.
What is not clear to me is whether Whitman is stuck on a huge cargo ship
gog in the direction set by Hurd and having a hard time changing it, or
whether she agrees with it.
She is stuck with underperforming departments such as BCS, so it can be
fairly to just cut those quickly to reduce losses. But this will give HP
a bad image in enterprise, so that is a cost that perhaps Whitman is
underestimating.
The project Odyssey better yield something concrete real soon otherwise
it will become a running joke.
Wasn't the Odyssey a myth? Is 'Athena' Whitman discussing HP's fate with
Zeus?
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
Michael Kraemer
2013-06-11 22:44:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by V***@SendSpamHere.ORG
Wasn't the Odyssey a myth?
Yep.
The one where the hero lost all ships,
all men, and was the sole survivor -
twenty years after.
Interesting times ahead for HP.
Post by V***@SendSpamHere.ORG
Is 'Athena' Whitman discussing HP's fate with
Zeus?
Or with Hades.
Arne Vajhøj
2013-06-12 00:49:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neil Rieck
When I heard why Tom Perkins left the board (wiring tapping by Patty
Dunn, etc.) I suspected that the people managing HP were not cut from
the same cloth as Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. Then HP seemed to
get its second wind by bringing in a technology person, Mark Hurd.
Then he was ejected for (now) seemingly trivial reasons at HP went
back to it pre-Hurd ways.
I do not consider Hurd to be a technology man.

He is a finance guy that has just happened to work
for technology companies.

And I think many of HP's later problems has root causes back in the
Hurd era.

It is ridiculous to blame Leo A for everything.
Post by Neil Rieck
Today, HP seems to be morphing into something closer commodity
computer companies like Dell. At least IBM and Oracle-Sun appear to
be working to making new head-way in IS/IT. At least, that is the way
it appears to me.
Yep.

And HP will regret it.

In the commodity market the only differentiator is the advertising
and customer can switch from day to day. And even if sales are good,
then profit margins are slim.

Arne
dcblogs
2013-06-11 15:46:26 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

I am a reporter at Computerworld. Interested in reaction to HP's end-of-life letter. What will this mean for users, ISVs, support? Is this a mistake on HP's part? Or an expected parting?

Will there be a second life effort for OpenVMS via emulation, open source, etc? An HP3000-like community effort or is this it? Fini.

Write: ***@computerworld.com

Cheers,

Patrick Thibodeau

Computerworld
MG
2013-06-11 16:09:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by dcblogs
I am a reporter at Computerworld. Interested in reaction to HP's end-of-life
letter. What will this mean for users, ISVs, support? Is this a mistake on
HP's part? Or an expected parting?
HP is one big 'mistake' (to put it gently).
Post by dcblogs
Will there be a second life effort for OpenVMS via emulation, open source,
etc?
Why don't you ask HP? VMS and its future is entirely at HP's mercy.
Post by dcblogs
An HP3000-like community effort or is this it? Fini.
I think the latter. I mean, there are few initiatives. Even existing
'community' sites, like OpenVMS Hobbyist (and the forum there), are
neglected and pretty much abandoned; even back when the "Hobbyist
Program" wasn't 'insourced' by HP yet.

The Usenet (here on comp.os.vms) and the DECUS/Encompasserve mailing
lists are the most active places.

Many VMS people are also above 50~60 years of age nowadays and I do
not think many will care about VMS, as they're about to retire anyway.
The ones that do care you'll find mostly here.

- MG
Arne Vajhøj
2013-06-12 00:52:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by dcblogs
I am a reporter at Computerworld. Interested in reaction to HP's
end-of-life letter. What will this mean for users, ISVs, support? Is
this a mistake on HP's part? Or an expected parting?
Will there be a second life effort for OpenVMS via emulation, open
source, etc? An HP3000-like community effort or is this it? Fini.
If you read the hundreds of posts in this and other threads
about the same topic, then I think you will get an impression
of peoples feelings.

Arne
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...