Unix administration - Re: HP FUDBusting

Author

Re: HP FUDBusting

Keith A. Lewis

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

yamahasw40@latinmail.com (Schmuck) writes in article <24819cc3.0307171340.ffd452d@posting.google.com> dated 17 Jul 2003 14:40:49 -0700:

quote:

>There is a lot of FUD coming out of various vendors about the future
>of HPs "other OSs". Ie.. if its not HP-UX, it will die with the switch
>to Itanium.

VMS has already been ported to Itanium. I don't know about Himalaya.
I think the plan for Tru64 is to "merge" it with HP-UX.

quote:

>What is the real deal? If I buy an Alphaserver today will I be dealing
>with HP Techs who can't even spell Tru64?

Considering that HP is still supporting VAX/VMS 9 years after the Alpha was
introduced, I don't think you have anything to worry about in your 5-7 year
timeframe.

FWIW, the port of our in-house software from VAX to Alpha was smooth. You
never know, Itanium price/performance could get good enough that you'll want
to move.

--Keith Lewis klewis$mitre.org
The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.

Keith A. Lewis

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

yamahasw40@latinmail.com (Schmuck) writes in article <24819cc3.0307171340.ffd452d@posting.google.com> dated 17 Jul 2003 14:40:49 -0700:

quote:

>There is a lot of FUD coming out of various vendors about the future
>of HPs "other OSs". Ie.. if its not HP-UX, it will die with the switch
>to Itanium.

VMS has already been ported to Itanium. I don't know about Himalaya.
I think the plan for Tru64 is to "merge" it with HP-UX.

quote:

>What is the real deal? If I buy an Alphaserver today will I be dealing
>with HP Techs who can't even spell Tru64?

Bob Koehler

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

In article <24819cc3.0307171340.ffd452d@posting.google.com>, yamahasw40@latinmail.com (Schmuck) writes:

quote:

> Hi all,
>
> First up.. have to admit that I am not an Alpha guy, but I am dealing
> with a site that is. I will probably expose my ignorance over the
> wealth of OSs available from HP in the next couple of lines, so please
> be kind.
>
> There is a lot of FUD coming out of various vendors about the future
> of HPs "other OSs". Ie.. if its not HP-UX, it will die with the switch
> to Itanium.
>
> What is the real deal? If I buy an Alphaserver today will I be dealing
> with HP Techs who can't even spell Tru64?

HP has announced plans to migrate Tru64 features into HP-UX and
end Tru64. These are publically available via HP's web site.
Tru64 will not be ported off Alpha.

quote:

> Essentially we need to consider the TCO of the shop before we
> recommend a platform. (I don't actually care that much.. Anybody but
> Microsoft). If these guys will have an uphill battle with support over
> the time-life of this sistem (predicted at 5 years with a possible
> stretch to 7), they are better off retraining their OSF and VMS guys
> upfront.

VMS is what you want. HP is spending lots of money on VMS and
has shipped the first release VMS on IA64 to partners to start
porting thier products. Take a look and see if the products you
need are already commited to ports. Most of this info can be
found on the OpenVMS web site or contact a HP sales folk and demand
a sales rep who known what VMS is.

You will, of course, here much FUD about VMS dying. Wasn't true
when Gartner was founded with it thier as their opening position
and even with all their clout they haven't been able to make it a
self fulfilling prophecy. VMS just keeps on keeping on. Security,
reliability, and low TCO are a hard to beat combination.

If VMS doesn't have what you want; then "anything but Microsoft"
drops you into "our UNIX is the same as all UNIX, but better". Do
try to have fun while sorting that all out, it's the only attitude
that will keep you from rolling your eyes 'till they're stuck.

OBTW, in case you miss my .sig, this is personal opinion, not
company endorsement. The company I work for will use any product
that fits.

Bob Koehler

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

In article <24819cc3.0307171340.ffd452d@posting.google.com>, yamahasw40@latinmail.com (Schmuck) writes:

quote:

> Hi all,
>
> First up.. have to admit that I am not an Alpha guy, but I am dealing
> with a site that is. I will probably expose my ignorance over the
> wealth of OSs available from HP in the next couple of lines, so please
> be kind.
>
> There is a lot of FUD coming out of various vendors about the future
> of HPs "other OSs". Ie.. if its not HP-UX, it will die with the switch
> to Itanium.
>
> What is the real deal? If I buy an Alphaserver today will I be dealing
> with HP Techs who can't even spell Tru64?

HP has announced plans to migrate Tru64 features into HP-UX and
end Tru64. These are publically available via HP's web site.
Tru64 will not be ported off Alpha.

quote:

> Essentially we need to consider the TCO of the shop before we
> recommend a platform. (I don't actually care that much.. Anybody but
> Microsoft). If these guys will have an uphill battle with support over
> the time-life of this sistem (predicted at 5 years with a possible
> stretch to 7), they are better off retraining their OSF and VMS guys
> upfront.

Bob Ceculski

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

"Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<EJ2cnXqAj_h094WiXTWJjQ@metrocast.net>...

quote:

>
> Possibly because there's reason for exactly that concern. Take a close look
> at the current VMS roadmap (no committed core development after next year,
> and precious little 2005 development even for layered products) - and keep
> in mind that HP's roadmaps are supposedly 5-year projections...
>
> If all you'll need for the next 7 years is what VMS will provide next year,
> and all the performance you'll require will be the modest increase scheduled
> for Alpha next year, and the ratcheting up of service and component prices
> that tends to occur when a platform (Alpha) becomes increasingly 'legacy' in
> nature is not a problem for you, you'll probably be happy with the choice.
>
> - bill

what in the heck do you want them to develop ... everything you need
is already there or will be on itanium ... xml is there, and that's
not even the so-called standard yet ... I don't know of too many
companies that develop 2 years out on software ... VMS already has
the best security and clustering out there ... most everyone now is
working on security for linux/windoze ... in other words, everyone
is still trying to play catch up to VMS ...

Bob Ceculski

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

"Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<EJ2cnXqAj_h094WiXTWJjQ@metrocast.net>...

quote:

>
> Possibly because there's reason for exactly that concern. Take a close look
> at the current VMS roadmap (no committed core development after next year,
> and precious little 2005 development even for layered products) - and keep
> in mind that HP's roadmaps are supposedly 5-year projections...
>
> If all you'll need for the next 7 years is what VMS will provide next year,
> and all the performance you'll require will be the modest increase scheduled
> for Alpha next year, and the ratcheting up of service and component prices
> that tends to occur when a platform (Alpha) becomes increasingly 'legacy' in
> nature is not a problem for you, you'll probably be happy with the choice.
>
> - bill

Bob Ceculski

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

yamahasw40@latinmail.com (Schmuck) wrote in message news:<24819cc3.0307171340.ffd452d@posting.google.com>...

quote:

> Hi all,
>
> First up.. have to admit that I am not an Alpha guy, but I am dealing
> with a site that is. I will probably expose my ignorance over the
> wealth of OSs available from HP in the next couple of lines, so please
> be kind.
>
> There is a lot of FUD coming out of various vendors about the future
> of HPs "other OSs". Ie.. if its not HP-UX, it will die with the switch
> to Itanium.
>
> What is the real deal? If I buy an Alphaserver today will I be dealing
> with HP Techs who can't even spell Tru64?
>
> Essentially we need to consider the TCO of the shop before we
> recommend a platform. (I don't actually care that much.. Anybody but
> Microsoft). If these guys will have an uphill battle with support over
> the time-life of this sistem (predicted at 5 years with a possible
> stretch to 7), they are better off retraining their OSF and VMS guys
> upfront.
>
> Any opinions appreciated.
>
> Matt

nobody beats OpenVMS for TCO ... its uptime is measured in years,
not in days ... its security means you don't have to join the
"patch of the day" club ... and it's features are years ahead of
anyting else ... training someone on VMS is easy ... you want tco,
just buy an alpha now, and you can always easily move to itanium
vms later, or if you run a cluster, just run an itanium alpha
mixed cluster ... webserver, apps server, database server, mail/
imap server, vms does it all, and it does it "CHEAPLY" ...
all vms shops have a big competitive/cost advantage over every
other non vms company out there ... I have 18 years under my
belt proving that ...

Stefaan A Eeckels

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On 18 Jul 2003 19:50:28 -0700
bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:

quote:

> ... most everyone now is
> working on security for linux/windoze ... in other words, everyone
> is still trying to play catch up to VMS ...

Isn't VMS a case of "security through obscurity"?

Just to make sure people get it: :-)

--
Stefaan
--
"What is stated clearly conceives easily." -- Inspired sales droid

Bob Ceculski

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

yamahasw40@latinmail.com (Schmuck) wrote in message news:<24819cc3.0307171340.ffd452d@posting.google.com>...

quote:

> Hi all,
>
> First up.. have to admit that I am not an Alpha guy, but I am dealing
> with a site that is. I will probably expose my ignorance over the
> wealth of OSs available from HP in the next couple of lines, so please
> be kind.
>
> There is a lot of FUD coming out of various vendors about the future
> of HPs "other OSs". Ie.. if its not HP-UX, it will die with the switch
> to Itanium.
>
> What is the real deal? If I buy an Alphaserver today will I be dealing
> with HP Techs who can't even spell Tru64?
>
> Essentially we need to consider the TCO of the shop before we
> recommend a platform. (I don't actually care that much.. Anybody but
> Microsoft). If these guys will have an uphill battle with support over
> the time-life of this sistem (predicted at 5 years with a possible
> stretch to 7), they are better off retraining their OSF and VMS guys
> upfront.
>
> Any opinions appreciated.
>
> Matt

Stefaan A Eeckels

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On 18 Jul 2003 19:50:28 -0700
bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:

quote:

> ... most everyone now is
> working on security for linux/windoze ... in other words, everyone
> is still trying to play catch up to VMS ...

Isn't VMS a case of "security through obscurity"?

Just to make sure people get it: :-)

--
Stefaan
--
"What is stated clearly conceives easily." -- Inspired sales droid

Bill Todd

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

"Stefaan A Eeckels" <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote in message
news:20030719104242.3e525210.hoendech@ecc.lu...

quote:

> On 18 Jul 2003 19:50:28 -0700
> bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:
>
>
> Isn't VMS a case of "security through obscurity"?

Hey - Bob may be an idiot, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Obscurity may help some, but even in an absolute sense VMS is almost
certainly more secure than most other systems out there, including Unix.
Its problems are with its owner, particularly with said owner's
disinclination to keep VMS current with market needs (or to make any effort
to market it - but why market a system that cHumPaq itself clearly considers
suitable only for its existing niches?).

- bill

Bill Todd

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

"Stefaan A Eeckels" <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote in message
news:20030719104242.3e525210.hoendech@ecc.lu...

quote:

> On 18 Jul 2003 19:50:28 -0700
> bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:
>
>
> Isn't VMS a case of "security through obscurity"?

Bob Ceculski

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote in message news:<20030719104242.3e525210.hoendech@ecc.lu>...

quote:

> On 18 Jul 2003 19:50:28 -0700
> bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:
>
>
> Isn't VMS a case of "security through obscurity"?
>
> Just to make sure people get it: :-)
>
> --
> Stefaan

no, vms is security through security ... and we all get it,
we get that you don't know what you are talking about!

Bob Ceculski

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote in message news:<20030719104242.3e525210.hoendech@ecc.lu>...

quote:

> On 18 Jul 2003 19:50:28 -0700
> bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:
>
>
> Isn't VMS a case of "security through obscurity"?
>
> Just to make sure people get it: :-)
>
> --
> Stefaan

no, vms is security through security ... and we all get it,
we get that you don't know what you are talking about!

Ed Ponzini

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

Regarding Tru64 Unix, see the 'Tru64 Unix to HP-UX Porting Guide' at HP's
site -- 238 pages.

"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0307171340.ffd452d@posting.google.com...

quote:

> Hi all,
>
> First up.. have to admit that I am not an Alpha guy, but I am dealing
> with a site that is. I will probably expose my ignorance over the
> wealth of OSs available from HP in the next couple of lines, so please
> be kind.
>
> There is a lot of FUD coming out of various vendors about the future
> of HPs "other OSs". Ie.. if its not HP-UX, it will die with the switch
> to Itanium.
>
> What is the real deal? If I buy an Alphaserver today will I be dealing
> with HP Techs who can't even spell Tru64?
>
> Essentially we need to consider the TCO of the shop before we
> recommend a platform. (I don't actually care that much.. Anybody but
> Microsoft). If these guys will have an uphill battle with support over
> the time-life of this sistem (predicted at 5 years with a possible
> stretch to 7), they are better off retraining their OSF and VMS guys
> upfront.
>
> Any opinions appreciated.
>
> Matt

Ed Ponzini

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

quote:

> Hi all,
>
> First up.. have to admit that I am not an Alpha guy, but I am dealing
> with a site that is. I will probably expose my ignorance over the
> wealth of OSs available from HP in the next couple of lines, so please
> be kind.
>
> There is a lot of FUD coming out of various vendors about the future
> of HPs "other OSs". Ie.. if its not HP-UX, it will die with the switch
> to Itanium.
>
> What is the real deal? If I buy an Alphaserver today will I be dealing
> with HP Techs who can't even spell Tru64?
>
> Essentially we need to consider the TCO of the shop before we
> recommend a platform. (I don't actually care that much.. Anybody but
> Microsoft). If these guys will have an uphill battle with support over
> the time-life of this sistem (predicted at 5 years with a possible
> stretch to 7), they are better off retraining their OSF and VMS guys
> upfront.
>
> Any opinions appreciated.
>
> Matt

Stefaan A Eeckels

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On 19 Jul 2003 09:25:46 -0700
bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:

quote:

>
> no, vms is security through security ... and we all get it,
> we get that you don't know what you are talking about!

Oh my, are we grumpy today.

I'm pleased for you you feel Compaq/HP's management
of VMS entirely satisfactory.

--
Stefaan
--
"What is stated clearly conceives easily." -- Inspired sales droid

Stefaan A Eeckels

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On 19 Jul 2003 09:25:46 -0700
bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:

quote:

>
> no, vms is security through security ... and we all get it,
> we get that you don't know what you are talking about!

Oh my, are we grumpy today.

I'm pleased for you you feel Compaq/HP's management
of VMS entirely satisfactory.

--
Stefaan
--
"What is stated clearly conceives easily." -- Inspired sales droid

Doc.Cypher

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote:

quote:

>On 19 Jul 2003 09:25:46 -0700
>bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:
>
>
>Oh my, are we grumpy today.

Bob's like that with anyone who doesn't believe that VMS will end world
hunger, stop script kiddies from breaking into systems, and achieve
marketplace domination.

I *hate* to say he's right, but VMS security has had many of the features that
Theo worked into BSD for a long time.

quote:

>I'm pleased for you you feel Compaq/HP's management
>of VMS entirely satisfactory.

Heh. As someone (presumably) from a *ix background, what would you suggest?

Those of us from comp.os.vms who remain critical want marketing, improved ISV
support, more Open Source packages available, and an improved education
programme. I believe the first of these is the critical one because without
awareness, the "VMS is dead" meme is self-perpetuating.

Believe it or not, there are rumours that hp is working on some of the others.

Doc.
--
OpenVMS. Eight out of ten hackers prefer *other* operating systems.
[New PGP Key - Get via finger] http://deathrow.vistech.net/BOFH/doc/

Doc.Cypher

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote:

quote:

>On 19 Jul 2003 09:25:46 -0700
>bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:
>
>
>Oh my, are we grumpy today.

quote:

>I'm pleased for you you feel Compaq/HP's management
>of VMS entirely satisfactory.

Stefaan A Eeckels

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On 21 Jul 2003 10:37:16 -0000
Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

quote:

> On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote:
>
> Bob's like that with anyone who doesn't believe that VMS will end world
> hunger, stop script kiddies from breaking into systems, and achieve
> marketplace domination.
>
> I *hate* to say he's right, but VMS security has had many of the
> features that Theo worked into BSD for a long time.

I know that.

quote:

>
> Heh. As someone (presumably) from a *ix background, what would you
> suggest?

I did some work on VMS way back in 1986-1987, but I'm more
of a Unix man by heart (I guess people who're primarly
programmers prefer Unix, whereas administrators prefer VMS).

quote:

> Those of us from comp.os.vms who remain critical want marketing,
> improved ISV support, more Open Source packages available, and an
> improved education programme. I believe the first of these is the
> critical one because without awareness, the "VMS is dead" meme is
> self-perpetuating.
>
> Believe it or not, there are rumours that hp is working on some of the
> others.

It's a difficult question. The PC juggernaut delivers such low
prices that any niche system (and the commercial Unixes are
rapidly becoming niche systems as well) that isn't the mainstay
of a company is bound to be ill-treated. Look at AIX, and HP's
Unixes, they're not exactly getting the royal treatment either.
Solaris is Sun's mainstay, but Sun's having its fair share of
problems for the same reasons the Unix boxes of HP and IBM are
selling slowly.

Windows and cheap PC hardware are the living proof that quality
doesn't sell computers if the price and performance differences
are too pronounced. People buy Mercs that are twice as expensive
as Chevies, but probably wouldn't buy them if they were five
times as expensive, and slower to boot.

I agree that awareness is very important - there's no way you'll
sell systems no-one knows about, and the natural staff turnover
in companies will ensure that the people who know VMS (or Unix)
and its advantages will be replaced by people comfortable with
Windows. Getting them to see the light will be very difficult
(I've first-hand experience with this).

Having 'modern' tools available is equally important. Without Apache,
Java, PHP, Perl, SSL, mysql etc., all the security in the world
isn't going to assure the continued use of VMS (let alone its adoption
by non-VMS shops).

Actually, I think that one of the solutions might be to have a
privately held 'Alpha/VMS/Tru64' company. The installed user base is
large enough that it would turn a profit, and have genuine
long-term prospects. The problem is that the Alpha/VMS/Tru64 profit
margin isn't substantial enough to stop HP from axing the processor
and the OSes, reasoning from their narrow stock market perspective.

--
Stefaan
--
"What is stated clearly conceives easily." -- Inspired sales droid

Fred Kleinsorge

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

Also add a very large grain of salt to anything your read by a very
disgruntled ex-DEC employee.

My bias is upfront and clear: I am a VMS developer employed by HP. My
opinion and advice for VMS is that it has a long term future here in HP.
From the bottom up, I have experienced nothing but positive comments from
hardware and software engineering organizations. We are well on our way to
delivering a general production release of VMS on Itanium in 2004, and while
the "public" roadmap may not have been updated in a while - that doesn't
mean anything. I am in HW design meetings for systems being developed for
the 2007 timeframe, and who want VMS input (just as an example). The short
term cost of doing the port to Itanium will ease over the next 12-18 months,
and let us expand the various functional and performance projects we are
working on. Itanium2 has achieved competetive performance with the leading
64-bit architectures, and it's roadmap will continue to put it at the
leading edge of performance and scaleability. It has wide, and widening
support from major vendors, and a choice of nearly any OS except Solaris.
HP has programs designed to retain our Alpha customers in the transition to
Itanium - talk to your local HP sales rep. In terms of UNIX, the big three
are IBM, HP, and Sun - pick your order depending on what criteria you want
to use. So with Tru64 features being ported to HP-UX -- you should be able
to plan your UNIX migration (or you can choose to migrate to Linux).

"Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message
news:EJ2cnXqAj_h094WiXTWJjQ@metrocast.net...

quote:

>
> "Bob Koehler" <koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org> wrote in message
> news:medSLAinDyGR@eisner.encompasserve.org...
>
> ...
>
>
> Most of it, unfortunately, on the port rather than on the core feature
> development that would make it more generally competitive and viable into
> the future. And, of course, HP continues the Compaq tradition of spending
> *nothing* on VMS marketing, which carries a strong message in itself.
>
> and
>
> Possibly because there's reason for exactly that concern. Take a close

look

quote:

> at the current VMS roadmap (no committed core development after next year,
> and precious little 2005 development even for layered products) - and keep
> in mind that HP's roadmaps are supposedly 5-year projections...
>
> If all you'll need for the next 7 years is what VMS will provide next

year,

quote:

> and all the performance you'll require will be the modest increase

scheduled

quote:

> for Alpha next year, and the ratcheting up of service and component prices
> that tends to occur when a platform (Alpha) becomes increasingly 'legacy'

quote:

> nature is not a problem for you, you'll probably be happy with the choice.
>
> - bill
>
>
>

Stefaan A Eeckels

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On 21 Jul 2003 10:37:16 -0000
Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

quote:

> On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote:
>
> Bob's like that with anyone who doesn't believe that VMS will end world
> hunger, stop script kiddies from breaking into systems, and achieve
> marketplace domination.
>
> I *hate* to say he's right, but VMS security has had many of the
> features that Theo worked into BSD for a long time.

I know that.

quote:

>
> Heh. As someone (presumably) from a *ix background, what would you
> suggest?

I did some work on VMS way back in 1986-1987, but I'm more
of a Unix man by heart (I guess people who're primarly
programmers prefer Unix, whereas administrators prefer VMS).

quote:

> Those of us from comp.os.vms who remain critical want marketing,
> improved ISV support, more Open Source packages available, and an
> improved education programme. I believe the first of these is the
> critical one because without awareness, the "VMS is dead" meme is
> self-perpetuating.
>
> Believe it or not, there are rumours that hp is working on some of the
> others.

Fred Kleinsorge

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

quote:

>
> "Bob Koehler" <koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org> wrote in message
> news:medSLAinDyGR@eisner.encompasserve.org...
>
> ...
>
>
> Most of it, unfortunately, on the port rather than on the core feature
> development that would make it more generally competitive and viable into
> the future. And, of course, HP continues the Compaq tradition of spending
> *nothing* on VMS marketing, which carries a strong message in itself.
>
> and
>
> Possibly because there's reason for exactly that concern. Take a close

look

quote:

> at the current VMS roadmap (no committed core development after next year,
> and precious little 2005 development even for layered products) - and keep
> in mind that HP's roadmaps are supposedly 5-year projections...
>
> If all you'll need for the next 7 years is what VMS will provide next

year,

quote:

> and all the performance you'll require will be the modest increase

scheduled

quote:

> for Alpha next year, and the ratcheting up of service and component prices
> that tends to occur when a platform (Alpha) becomes increasingly 'legacy'

quote:

> nature is not a problem for you, you'll probably be happy with the choice.
>
> - bill
>
>
>

Doc.Cypher

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote:

quote:

>On 21 Jul 2003 10:37:16 -0000
>Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

quote:

>
>I know that.

Ah, an *ix person with a broad background. How refreshing.

quote:

>I did some work on VMS way back in 1986-1987, but I'm more
>of a Unix man by heart (I guess people who're primarly
>programmers prefer Unix, whereas administrators prefer VMS).

It's very much a different mindset for programming on VMS, from a recent
presentation there was a comment about it being possible to treat VMS just
like another *ix. Once things like the lack of fork are overcome, you'd only
need to add a suitable shell for those from an *ix background to feel more
comfortable.

quote:

>
>It's a difficult question. The PC juggernaut delivers such low
>prices that any niche system (and the commercial Unixes are
>rapidly becoming niche systems as well) that isn't the mainstay
>of a company is bound to be ill-treated. Look at AIX, and HP's
>Unixes, they're not exactly getting the royal treatment either.
>Solaris is Sun's mainstay, but Sun's having its fair share of
>problems for the same reasons the Unix boxes of HP and IBM are
>selling slowly.

You'll get our other troll out from under his bridge commenting about Sun.

quote:

>Windows and cheap PC hardware are the living proof that quality
>doesn't sell computers if the price and performance differences
>are too pronounced. People buy Mercs that are twice as expensive
>as Chevies, but probably wouldn't buy them if they were five
>times as expensive, and slower to boot.

Ack. Part of what people buy into is the quality/reliability/ease of
maintenance. Many are even convinced that over the long term it costs them
less.

quote:

>I agree that awareness is very important - there's no way you'll
>sell systems no-one knows about, and the natural staff turnover
>in companies will ensure that the people who know VMS (or Unix)
>and its advantages will be replaced by people comfortable with
>Windows. Getting them to see the light will be very difficult
>(I've first-hand experience with this).

Windows weenies? LART 'em till they glow.

quote:

>Having 'modern' tools available is equally important. Without Apache,
>Java, PHP, Perl, SSL, mysql etc., all the security in the world
>isn't going to assure the continued use of VMS (let alone its adoption
>by non-VMS shops).

Apache - check.
Java - check.
PHP - check.
Perl - check.
OpenSSL - check.
MySQL - check.

;-)

quote:

>Actually, I think that one of the solutions might be to have a
>privately held 'Alpha/VMS/Tru64' company.

Perchance called d|i|g|t|a|l?

quote:

>The installed user base is
>large enough that it would turn a profit, and have genuine
>long-term prospects. The problem is that the Alpha/VMS/Tru64 profit
>margin isn't substantial enough to stop HP from axing the processor
>and the OSes, reasoning from their narrow stock market perspective.

Alpha is on the way out, and a porter's version (v8.0) of VMS on Itanium is
now available.

(Not for Stefaan's benefit...)
BUT WHERE'S THE #$%ING MARKETING?

Doc.
--
OpenVMS. Eight out of ten hackers prefer *other* operating systems.
[New PGP Key - Get via finger] http://deathrow.vistech.net/BOFH/doc/

Doc.Cypher

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> wrote:

quote:

>On 21 Jul 2003 10:37:16 -0000
>Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

quote:

>
>I know that.

Ah, an *ix person with a broad background. How refreshing.

quote:

>I did some work on VMS way back in 1986-1987, but I'm more
>of a Unix man by heart (I guess people who're primarly
>programmers prefer Unix, whereas administrators prefer VMS).

quote:

>
>It's a difficult question. The PC juggernaut delivers such low
>prices that any niche system (and the commercial Unixes are
>rapidly becoming niche systems as well) that isn't the mainstay
>of a company is bound to be ill-treated. Look at AIX, and HP's
>Unixes, they're not exactly getting the royal treatment either.
>Solaris is Sun's mainstay, but Sun's having its fair share of
>problems for the same reasons the Unix boxes of HP and IBM are
>selling slowly.

You'll get our other troll out from under his bridge commenting about Sun.

quote:

>Windows and cheap PC hardware are the living proof that quality
>doesn't sell computers if the price and performance differences
>are too pronounced. People buy Mercs that are twice as expensive
>as Chevies, but probably wouldn't buy them if they were five
>times as expensive, and slower to boot.

Ack. Part of what people buy into is the quality/reliability/ease of
maintenance. Many are even convinced that over the long term it costs them
less.

quote:

>I agree that awareness is very important - there's no way you'll
>sell systems no-one knows about, and the natural staff turnover
>in companies will ensure that the people who know VMS (or Unix)
>and its advantages will be replaced by people comfortable with
>Windows. Getting them to see the light will be very difficult
>(I've first-hand experience with this).

Windows weenies? LART 'em till they glow.

quote:

>Having 'modern' tools available is equally important. Without Apache,
>Java, PHP, Perl, SSL, mysql etc., all the security in the world
>isn't going to assure the continued use of VMS (let alone its adoption
>by non-VMS shops).

Apache - check.
Java - check.
PHP - check.
Perl - check.
OpenSSL - check.
MySQL - check.

;-)

quote:

>Actually, I think that one of the solutions might be to have a
>privately held 'Alpha/VMS/Tru64' company.

Perchance called d|i|g|t|a|l?

quote:

>The installed user base is
>large enough that it would turn a profit, and have genuine
>long-term prospects. The problem is that the Alpha/VMS/Tru64 profit
>margin isn't substantial enough to stop HP from axing the processor
>and the OSes, reasoning from their narrow stock market perspective.

Bob Koehler

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

In article <EJ2cnXqAj_h094WiXTWJjQ@metrocast.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:

quote:

>
> "Bob Koehler" <koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org> wrote in message
> news:medSLAinDyGR@eisner.encompasserve.org...
>
>
> Possibly because ...

See, I told you so. Some of these quys are more predictable than the
tides.

Bob Koehler

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

In article <26ndfb.o7p.ln@news.heiming.de>, Michael Heiming <michael+USENET@www.heiming.de> writes:

quote:

> In comp.unix.admin Schmuck <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> HP wants to port some features from Tru64 to HP-UX, including AdvFS, lsm
> and of course TruCluster. Which is IMHO deep in the kernel, so we'll
> probably never know what there is really left from HP-UX once they
> started "porting".
> ;)

Although HP-UX is SVID on the outside, I understand its got a BSD
kernel inside. Tru64 being the last name of digital's OSF-1, I seem
to recall that also has a BSD heritage. So porting kernel parts
may not be that hard.

If I was using Tru64 feautures such as TruCluster today, I'd want
HP to provide a supported clustering confiuration that included
HP-UX and Tru64 systems before I'd lean too heavily on the port
being complete.
[QUOTE][color=darkred]

They may end up sitting next to the Ultrix support folks, but the
real question is when? You really should check out HP's publically
available support plans for Tru64 to get a better idea of when.

Bob Koehler

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

In article <EJ2cnXqAj_h094WiXTWJjQ@metrocast.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:

quote:

>
> "Bob Koehler" <koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org> wrote in message
> news:medSLAinDyGR@eisner.encompasserve.org...
>
>
> Possibly because ...

See, I told you so. Some of these quys are more predictable than the
tides.

Bob Koehler

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

In article <26ndfb.o7p.ln@news.heiming.de>, Michael Heiming <michael+USENET@www.heiming.de> writes:

quote:

> In comp.unix.admin Schmuck <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> HP wants to port some features from Tru64 to HP-UX, including AdvFS, lsm
> and of course TruCluster. Which is IMHO deep in the kernel, so we'll
> probably never know what there is really left from HP-UX once they
> started "porting".
> ;)

Bill Todd

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

"Bob Koehler" <koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org> wrote in message
news:237fMmuEMtSc@eisner.encompasserve.org...

quote:

> In article <EJ2cnXqAj_h094WiXTWJjQ@metrocast.net>, "Bill Todd"

<billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:

quote:

>
> See, I told you so. Some of these quys are more predictable than the
> tides.

Of course: you don't think that people are just going to *forget* about the
way Alpha's unequivocally 'committed' future was suddenly and
unceremoniously axed with zero warning, do you? And be blind to the
parallels that apply equally to VMS?

'Full disclosure' is my motto. You're equally free to try to explain why
people should place their business' futures in cHumPaq's hands (very much as
the 'commitment to Alpha' letter encouraged them to do less than two years
before the rug got yanked out) - though coming up with *concrete* reasons to
do so may be something of a challenge, given the historical record plus the
current minimal investment in VMS development and on-going zero investment
in VMS marketing.

- bill

Bill Todd

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

"Bob Koehler" <koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org> wrote in message
news:237fMmuEMtSc@eisner.encompasserve.org...

quote:

> In article <EJ2cnXqAj_h094WiXTWJjQ@metrocast.net>, "Bill Todd"

<billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:

quote:

>
> See, I told you so. Some of these quys are more predictable than the
> tides.

Brian Tillman

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

>I guess people who're primarly programmers prefer Unix, whereas
administrators prefer VMS

Perhaps among the programmers you know, but that's a self-selected list and
very atypical.
--
Brian Tillman Internet: Brian.Tillman at smiths-aerospace dot com
Smiths Aerospace Addresses modified to prevent SPAM.
3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3 Replace "at" with "@", "dot" with "."
Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991
This opinion doesn't represent that of my company

Brian Tillman

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

Juhana Siren

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:

quote:

> Perchance called d|i|g|t|a|l?

"Digtal"?

ITYM "d|i|g|i|t|a|l"

--
****** Juhana Siren ***** Juhana.Siren@oulu.fi ***** OH8HTH (2 m, 70 cm) ******
--Buddhist at a hot dog stand: "Make me one with everything."--

Stefaan A Eeckels

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On 22 Jul 2003 08:50:44 -0500
koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:

quote:

> In article <20030721155805.6f3aee4d.hoendech@ecc.lu>, Stefaan A Eeckels
> <hoendech@ecc.lu> writes:
>
> Guess again. Just because you like to program on UNIX doesn't
> make it universal.

My guess was based on (limited) personal observation.
It wasn't meant to claim that no programmers prefer VMS,
and no admins prefer Unix. On the whole, and given
good admins and good programmers with experience of both
OSes, I think it holds true.

--
Stefaan
--
"What is stated clearly conceives easily." -- Inspired sales droid

John Travell

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

"Juhana Siren" <Juhana.Siren@oulu.fi> wrote in message
news:m3k7a9dbnb.fsf@oulu.fi...

quote:

> Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:
>
>
> "Digtal"?
>
> ITYM "d|i|g|i|t|a|l"
>

I once visited a company that had cut up and re-arranged a d|i|g|i|t|a|l
sticker to read p|i|g|t|a|i|l

--
John Travell
VMS crashdump expertise for hire
john@jomatech.com
+44-(0)23-92552229
http://www.jomatech.com/

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.500 / Virus Database: 298 - Release Date: 10/07/2003

Michael Vilain

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

In article <vhrkfiqjgnrq17@corp.supernews.com>,
Michael Rice <marice@whiteice.com> wrote:

quote:

> On 7/21/2003 8:58 AM, Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
> [snip]
> [snip]
>
> After 10+ years of writing software for VMS, Unix and Windows,
> everything from device drivers to GUIs, I'd definitely put VMS at the
> top of the "joy to program on" list. The overall consistency of the
> system services, RTL, LP libraries, etc. makes VMS infinitely better
> than Unix or Windows. Additionally, you can study the internals and
> they actually make sense! I love writing code for almost all platforms,
> but from a software engineering perspective, VMS is far superior to the
> others.
>

When the extra access control stuff went into VMS 5.<I forget>, there
were a whole series of internal kernel datastructures with prefixes like
CIA$_, KGB$_, NSA$_ and maybe MI6$_. Leave it to the VMS kernel team
(the orginators of the "See Figure 1" responce to customer requests for
VMS enhancements). I wonder if Dick Hustvedt, a key VMS kernel
developer, who was injured in a car accident ever recovered from his
coma.

Those were the haydays. Bet Uncle Ken is sublimely happy these days.
Wonder if he still drives that Plymouth...

--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...

Juhana Siren

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:

quote:

> Perchance called d|i|g|t|a|l?

"Digtal"?

ITYM "d|i|g|i|t|a|l"

--
****** Juhana Siren ***** Juhana.Siren@oulu.fi ***** OH8HTH (2 m, 70 cm) ******
--Buddhist at a hot dog stand: "Make me one with everything."--

Stefaan A Eeckels

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

On 22 Jul 2003 08:50:44 -0500
koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:

quote:

> In article <20030721155805.6f3aee4d.hoendech@ecc.lu>, Stefaan A Eeckels
> <hoendech@ecc.lu> writes:
>
> Guess again. Just because you like to program on UNIX doesn't
> make it universal.

John Travell

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

"Juhana Siren" <Juhana.Siren@oulu.fi> wrote in message
news:m3k7a9dbnb.fsf@oulu.fi...

quote:

> Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:
>
>
> "Digtal"?
>
> ITYM "d|i|g|i|t|a|l"
>

Michael Vilain

2004-01-23, 4:29 pm

In article <vhrkfiqjgnrq17@corp.supernews.com>,
Michael Rice <marice@whiteice.com> wrote:

quote:

> On 7/21/2003 8:58 AM, Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
> [snip]
> [snip]
>
> After 10+ years of writing software for VMS, Unix and Windows,
> everything from device drivers to GUIs, I'd definitely put VMS at the
> top of the "joy to program on" list. The overall consistency of the
> system services, RTL, LP libraries, etc. makes VMS infinitely better
> than Unix or Windows. Additionally, you can study the internals and
> they actually make sense! I love writing code for almost all platforms,
> but from a software engineering perspective, VMS is far superior to the
> others.
>

Bill Gunshannon

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In article <20030722205651.4071.qmail@gacracker.org>,
Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:

quote:

> On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, "Brian Tillman" <Tillman@sparkingwire.com> wrote:
>
> Quite.
>
> When you've horribly mangled something and have a versioning filesystem you'll
> be thankful.

1. Any programmer worth his salt saves intermediate versions of his work
in case a roll back is required. Even if the system has versions.

2. Any of the source management tools some of which have been available
on Unix since the early days (RCS, SCCS, CVS) make rollbacks possible if
you decide you went the wrong way.

But, just like with VMS, it is the programmers responsibility to make
use of the tools available to him. (you can set the versions to 1 in
your login.com and I have seen students do this in order to save space
because their quotas were low.)

It always comes back to the same thing, On ei snot necessarily better than
the other, just different. Better or worse is in the eye of the beholder.

bill

--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>

Bill Gunshannon

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In article <20030722205651.4071.qmail@gacracker.org>,
Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:

quote:

> On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, "Brian Tillman" <Tillman@sparkingwire.com> wrote:
>
> Quite.
>
> When you've horribly mangled something and have a versioning filesystem you'll
> be thankful.

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In article <20030721103716.26065.qmail@gacracker.org>,
Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

quote:

> I *hate* to say he's right, but VMS security has had many of the features that
> Theo worked into BSD for a long time.

Hmmm.

VMS security is organised on a completely different dimension than UNIX:
the fine grained security on VMS is based on explicit rights rather than
assigning resources to user IDs and delegating access control to code
running under those IDs.

UNIX style security (which isn't just used by UNIX: NT borrowed from UNIX as
well as VMS here) fails when developers missing the point of group ownership
of resources and making applications run as root rather than a less
privileged ID. The Berkeley socket API made this worse by requiring root
access to open "privileged" ports, rather than delegating that right to
a group. In NT this problem is manifest in the number of services that
apparently need to run as "Local System".

VMS style security fails when an combination of rights can be used to 'boost'
privilege to gain additional rights that weren't intended. In VMS there have
been relatively few of these attacks discovered, but other systems that
borrowed the VMS fine-grained rights model have been less lucky.

NT seems to have combined both of these approaches. Within a few minutes of
sitting down at an NT box for the first time I was able to take advantage
of that and boost my privileges to those of the scheduler service and launch
an application as "Local System".

Oops.

I understand they've fixed that one, but mixing two such divergent mechanisms
seems to me to be asking for trouble. Are you sure that it's really correct
to characterise the features Theo's been adding to OpenBSD as something that
might have been borrowed from VMS?

--
I've seen things you people can't imagine. Chimneysweeps on fire over the roofs
of London. I've watched kite-strings glitter in the sun at Hyde Park Gate. All
these things will be lost in time, like chalk-paintings in the rain. `-_-'
Time for your nap. | Peter da Silva | Har du kramat din varg, idag? 'U`

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In article <20030721103716.26065.qmail@gacracker.org>,
Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

quote:

> I *hate* to say he's right, but VMS security has had many of the features that
> Theo worked into BSD for a long time.

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In article <news-21ABEB.01290623072003@news.tdl.com>,
Michael Vilain <vilain@spamcop.net> wrote:

quote:

> Leave it to the VMS kernel team
> (the orginators of the "See Figure 1" responce to customer requests for
> VMS enhancements).

Don't let Barb hear you talking like that.

--
I've seen things you people can't imagine. Chimneysweeps on fire over the roofs
of London. I've watched kite-strings glitter in the sun at Hyde Park Gate. All
these things will be lost in time, like chalk-paintings in the rain. `-_-'
Time for your nap. | Peter da Silva | Har du kramat din varg, idag? 'U`

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In article <news-21ABEB.01290623072003@news.tdl.com>,
Michael Vilain <vilain@spamcop.net> wrote:

quote:

> Leave it to the VMS kernel team
> (the orginators of the "See Figure 1" responce to customer requests for
> VMS enhancements).

Nico Kadel-Garcia

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

Peter da Silva wrote:

quote:

> In article <news-21ABEB.01290623072003@news.tdl.com>,
> Michael Vilain <vilain@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Don't let Barb hear you talking like that.
>

Why? David Cutler and his pirate ship of code thieves got hired by
Microsoft to publish NT based on VMS source code, so if Michael means
them they got to continue their behavior....

Nico Kadel-Garcia

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

Peter da Silva wrote:

quote:

> In article <news-21ABEB.01290623072003@news.tdl.com>,
> Michael Vilain <vilain@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Don't let Barb hear you talking like that.
>

Why? David Cutler and his pirate ship of code thieves got hired by
Microsoft to publish NT based on VMS source code, so if Michael means
them they got to continue their behavior....

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In article <26ndfb.o7p.ln@news.heiming.de>,
Michael Heiming <michael+USENET@www.heiming.de> wrote:

quote:

> HP wants to port some features from Tru64 to HP-UX, including AdvFS, lsm
> and of course TruCluster. Which is IMHO deep in the kernel, so we'll
> probably never know what there is really left from HP-UX once they
> started "porting".

While that does sound encouraging, there have been multiple statements
from HP people that the next generation will not have a Tru64 based kernel.

Certainly adding a new file system to an OS is not terribly traumatic, and
while you'd expect clustering to require a wholesale migration it seems that
there's too much HP's added to their original kernel for them to be willing
to port it the other way.

--
I've seen things you people can't imagine. Chimneysweeps on fire over the roofs
of London. I've watched kite-strings glitter in the sun at Hyde Park Gate. All
these things will be lost in time, like chalk-paintings in the rain. `-_-'
Time for your nap. | Peter da Silva | Har du kramat din varg, idag? 'U`

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In article <26ndfb.o7p.ln@news.heiming.de>,
Michael Heiming <michael+USENET@www.heiming.de> wrote:

quote:

> HP wants to port some features from Tru64 to HP-UX, including AdvFS, lsm
> and of course TruCluster. Which is IMHO deep in the kernel, so we'll
> probably never know what there is really left from HP-UX once they
> started "porting".

Brian Tillman

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

>It would seem your VMS security experience predates V4 or so,

ACLs and resource identifiers apperared in V4.3, ISTR.
--
Brian Tillman Internet: Brian.Tillman at smiths-aerospace dot com
Smiths Aerospace Addresses modified to prevent SPAM.
3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3 Replace "at" with "@", "dot" with "."
Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991
This opinion doesn't represent that of my company

Brian Tillman

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

James T. Dennis

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In comp.unix.admin Bill Gunshannon <bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu> wrote:

quote:

> In article <20030722205651.4071.qmail@gacracker.org>,
> Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
> 1. Any programmer worth his salt saves intermediate versions of his work
> in case a roll back is required. Even if the system has versions.

quote:

> 2. Any of the source management tools some of which have been available
> on Unix since the early days (RCS, SCCS, CVS) make rollbacks possible if
> you decide you went the wrong way.

quote:

> But, just like with VMS, it is the programmers responsibility to make
> use of the tools available to him. (you can set the versions to 1 in
> your login.com and I have seen students do this in order to save space
> because their quotas were low.)

quote:

> It always comes back to the same thing, On ei snot necessarily better than
> the other, just different. Better or worse is in the eye of the beholder.

quote:

> bill

This is another example of the classic "mechanism" vs. policy debate.
UNIX provides mechanisms (mostly in userspace) to provide file versioning,
version control, and transactional/rollback capabilities. UNIX favors a
client/server approach to most of these issues --- CVS and any common
RDBMS are examples. Let the DBMS or the version control system manage
their own transactional needs according to their unique requirements.

Of course any version of UNIX *can* also offer filesystem versioning and
some experimental patches add this to Linux.

--
Jim Dennis,
Starshine: Signed, Sealed, Delivered

James T. Dennis

2004-01-23, 4:30 pm

In comp.unix.admin Bill Gunshannon <bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu> wrote:

quote:

> In article <20030722205651.4071.qmail@gacracker.org>,
> Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
> 1. Any programmer worth his salt saves intermediate versions of his work
> in case a roll back is required. Even if the system has versions.

quote:

> 2. Any of the source management tools some of which have been available
> on Unix since the early days (RCS, SCCS, CVS) make rollbacks possible if
> you decide you went the wrong way.

quote:

> But, just like with VMS, it is the programmers responsibility to make
> use of the tools available to him. (you can set the versions to 1 in
> your login.com and I have seen students do this in order to save space
> because their quotas were low.)

quote:

> It always comes back to the same thing, On ei snot necessarily better than
> the other, just different. Better or worse is in the eye of the beholder.

quote:

> bill

Michael Vilain

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <BB5933E2.17DD5%x@wedontwantyourspam.com>,
nospam <x@wedontwantyourspam.com> wrote:

quote:

> in article AHUSa.503$4Q.409@news.cpqcorp.net, Fred Kleinsorge at
> my-last-name@stardotzko.dec.com wrote on 22/07/2003 02:40:
>
> I've spoken with people with that attitude before. Sitting high in the
> foliage of there tree with a nice clear view of the future only too see them
> start hit the ground with an unexpected chain saw. The history of vendors is
> not a pretty picture and I trust nothing much any more. Though I hope things
> do continue as you see them.

Are you old enough to remember Uncle Ken killing Jupiter in favor of the
8600? It pissed off a lot of DEC-10 people. Vendors are businesses.
Just wait long enough and your tree will get chopped down. Just look at
what Oracle did with DEC's premier database Rdb! It's not in there
price book any more and it could run circles around Oracle under heavy
load.

Then there's that situation when DEC lawyers found all that Prism code
from David Cutler's cancelled RISC project in NT. Can you say "Bend
over, Bill?" And they did...

--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...

Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <news-3FCFBA.02005508082003@news.tdl.com>, "Michael Vilain <vilain@spamcop.net>" writes:

quote:

>In article <BB5933E2.17DD5%x@wedontwantyourspam.com>,
> nospam <x@wedontwantyourspam.com> wrote:
>
>
>Are you old enough to remember Uncle Ken killing Jupiter in favor of the
>8600? It pissed off a lot of DEC-10 people. Vendors are businesses.
>Just wait long enough and your tree will get chopped down. Just look at
>what Oracle did with DEC's premier database Rdb! It's not in there
>price book any more and it could run circles around Oracle under heavy
>load.

I don't know what "not in there price book any more" means, but in fact Oracle
is still selling it (for extortionate prices, not unlike Oracle Server's
prices), it's still being developed, evaluation copy is available for free
download from OTN, there are Oracle Technology Forums in different worldwide
locations - I'm signed up for the one in September at Oracle World Headquarters
- and it's a living, breathing, revenue-producing product which they've
promised to port to Itanium.

Please don't FUD Rdb! We customers have enough trouble,

-- Alan
--
========================================
=======================================
Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL Phone: 650/926-3056
Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA 94025
========================================
=======================================

Michael Vilain

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <BB5933E2.17DD5%x@wedontwantyourspam.com>,
nospam <x@wedontwantyourspam.com> wrote:

quote:

> in article AHUSa.503$4Q.409@news.cpqcorp.net, Fred Kleinsorge at
> my-last-name@stardotzko.dec.com wrote on 22/07/2003 02:40:
>
> I've spoken with people with that attitude before. Sitting high in the
> foliage of there tree with a nice clear view of the future only too see them
> start hit the ground with an unexpected chain saw. The history of vendors is
> not a pretty picture and I trust nothing much any more. Though I hope things
> do continue as you see them.

Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <news-3FCFBA.02005508082003@news.tdl.com>, "Michael Vilain <vilain@spamcop.net>" writes:

quote:

>In article <BB5933E2.17DD5%x@wedontwantyourspam.com>,
> nospam <x@wedontwantyourspam.com> wrote:
>
>
>Are you old enough to remember Uncle Ken killing Jupiter in favor of the
>8600? It pissed off a lot of DEC-10 people. Vendors are businesses.
>Just wait long enough and your tree will get chopped down. Just look at
>what Oracle did with DEC's premier database Rdb! It's not in there
>price book any more and it could run circles around Oracle under heavy
>load.

Nico Kadel-Garcia

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

"Michael Vilain " wrote:

quote:

> Are you old enough to remember Uncle Ken killing Jupiter in favor of the
> 8600? It pissed off a lot of DEC-10 people. Vendors are businesses.
> Just wait long enough and your tree will get chopped down. Just look at
> what Oracle did with DEC's premier database Rdb! It's not in there
> price book any more and it could run circles around Oracle under heavy
> load.
>
> Then there's that situation when DEC lawyers found all that Prism code
> from David Cutler's cancelled RISC project in NT. Can you say "Bend
> over, Bill?" And they did...

No, they said "leave the money on the dresser" and "here's a restraining
order" to a rapist, who then went on to do the same sort of thing to
other victims. And the money was maybe a week's pay, and the
"restraining order" to always make Windows NT work with Alpha was fairly
useless since Intel stole key Alpha technologies for the Pentium 4.

There's a lesson there: when violated by an abuser, especially by such a
consistent abuser, get him *convicted* instead of settling out of court.

Nico Kadel-Garcia

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

"Michael Vilain " wrote:

quote:

> Are you old enough to remember Uncle Ken killing Jupiter in favor of the
> 8600? It pissed off a lot of DEC-10 people. Vendors are businesses.
> Just wait long enough and your tree will get chopped down. Just look at
> what Oracle did with DEC's premier database Rdb! It's not in there
> price book any more and it could run circles around Oracle under heavy
> load.
>
> Then there's that situation when DEC lawyers found all that Prism code
> from David Cutler's cancelled RISC project in NT. Can you say "Bend
> over, Bill?" And they did...

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <20030729151558.15837.qmail@gacracker.org>,
Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

quote:

> My (somewhat limited) understanding was that things like the stack protection
> measures were sufficiently similar to those in VMS that they could be
> described as separate implementations of very similar concepts.

Um.

Things like non-executable stacks are common to a lot of operating
systems, including UNIX variants... even some fairly old UNIX ones.

--
I've seen things you people can't imagine. Chimneysweeps on fire over the roofs
of London. I've watched kite-strings glitter in the sun at Hyde Park Gate. All
these things will be lost in time, like chalk-paintings in the rain. `-_-'
Time for your nap. | Peter da Silva | Har du kramat din varg, idag? 'U`

Bob Koehler

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <bh1084$1k1n$1@jeeves.eng.abbnm.com>, peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

quote:

>
> Things like non-executable stacks are common to a lot of operating
> systems, including UNIX variants... even some fairly old UNIX ones.

Non-executable stacks require underlying hardware support no matter
what OS you put on the system. Few processors provide this.

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <20030729151558.15837.qmail@gacracker.org>,
Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

quote:

> My (somewhat limited) understanding was that things like the stack protection
> measures were sufficiently similar to those in VMS that they could be
> described as separate implementations of very similar concepts.

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <jmGUDWuDIO+s@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
Bob Koehler <koehler@eisner.aspm.encompasserve.org> wrote:

quote:

> In article <bh1084$1k1n$1@jeeves.eng.abbnm.com>, peter@abbnm.com (Peter
> da Silva) writes:
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
> Non-executable stacks require underlying hardware support no matter
> what OS you put on the system. Few processors provide this.

Few modern RISC processors, maybe, but is that a cause or an effect?

After all, the PDP-11 happens to be one that does. Split I&D and pure text
code in V7 and 2BSD had non-executable stacks by default... but 4BSD
didn't, and running 4BSD is what most RISCs seem to have been optimised
for.

--
I've seen things you people can't imagine. Chimneysweeps on fire over the roofs
of London. I've watched kite-strings glitter in the sun at Hyde Park Gate. All
these things will be lost in time, like chalk-paintings in the rain. `-_-'
Time for your nap. | Peter da Silva | Har du kramat din varg, idag? 'U`

Bob Koehler

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <bh1084$1k1n$1@jeeves.eng.abbnm.com>, peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

quote:

>
> Things like non-executable stacks are common to a lot of operating
> systems, including UNIX variants... even some fairly old UNIX ones.

Non-executable stacks require underlying hardware support no matter
what OS you put on the system. Few processors provide this.

Peter da Silva

2004-01-23, 4:31 pm

In article <jmGUDWuDIO+s@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
Bob Koehler <koehler@eisner.aspm.encompasserve.org> wrote:

quote:

> In article <bh1084$1k1n$1@jeeves.eng.abbnm.com>, peter@abbnm.com (Peter
> da Silva) writes:
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
> Non-executable stacks require underlying hardware support no matter
> what OS you put on the system. Few processors provide this.