[Info-vax] IPsec the key to WEB-3

[JF Mezei]

Richard Maher wrote:

> Obvious to you perhaps. May I ask what makes you so confident of that
> decision.

Taking out a plan from the roadmap is pretty official. This wasn't an
april fool's thing.  Like it or not, it has happened.

There is no point in fighting it.

If you can't see the writing on the wall as HP excises more and more
parts off VMS, then be patient, the font size and the boldness will
continue to increase and soon you should be able to read the writing on
the wall. Many others have seen it for some time.

Once you have decided you want VMS customers to migrate from VMS to
other HP products, you don't want to add features to VMS that will slow
this process down. Removing IPsec is logical from that point of view.



> There are more than enough funds available. 

Budgets are controlled by people higher than McQuaid. And more and more,
it is folks outside of VMS who tell VMS what to do in terms of features.

So again, blame HP, don't blame the VMS group. Their hands are tied,
they have to do what they are being told, and often, it isn't easy for
people who have VMS' best interest at heart to be forced to take steps
that go against that.

> There are plenty of dollars available if the right people/projects
> were axed. This is where the treachery against VMS lies, and has done for
> over 15 years :-(


When VMS was Digital's core product, the above applied well. But under
HP, VMS is just a liability they inherited from the purchase of Compaq.
It maty still be sligtly profitable, but to HP, they would much rather
shut down VMS and move VMS customers over to HP-UX. This would allow
them to save on all VMS development costs, and it would add to the HP-UX
numbers, making HP-UX appear to have greater market share.

The big difference with the past (palmer, capellas) is that HP is going
about it in a much smarter and slower way, and this may result in HP
succesfully retaining a greater percentage of VMS customers at the end
of the day.