[Info-vax] Anyone interested in another public access system

[Richard B. Gilbert]

David J Dachtera wrote:
> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> In article <49D6D457.A96B7D25 at spam.comcast.net>,
>>         David J Dachtera <djesys.no at spam.comcast.net> writes:
>>> [snip]
>>> Need I go on?
>> No, when your measure of modern computing is whatever is VMS-style
>> I guess anything that isn't VMS is deficient. 
> 
> What would you prefer as a "gold standard" against which to measure?
> 
> Windows?
> 
> (MS-)DOS?
> 
> CP/M?
> 
> TRSDOS?
> 
>> So, how much longer
>> than Unix is VMS going to be around?  Forgetting all measures except
>> delivering what the custome needs and wants, which is mnore successful?
> 
> It Depends. Define "success".
> 
>> How many times do you need to be told that Unix is adaptable enough that
>> pretty much any of the things you mentioned could have been (and still
>> could be) added except that Unix users don't see them as something to
>> be bothered about.
> 
> Probably until they actually come about. Are you volunteering?
> 
>>> I've no way to know whether there is any hope of ever getting any new
>>> blood in OpenVMS engineering, but I'm hoping someone, somewhere, perhaps
>>> in VMS V10.0-1 will solve the "fork()" problem and in doing so solve
>>> many of the incompatibilities between UN*X and VMS, perhaps even merge

What would you do with fork() in VMS if you had it?  If you want it, why 
not just run Unix?