[Info-vax] VMS to Integrity application porting report not updated for 2 years?

[Neil Rieck]

On Sep 22, 9:13 am, Jan-Erik Söderholm <jan-erik.soderh... at telia.com>
wrote:
> Tom Adams wrote:
> > On Sep 21, 9:33 pm, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spam... at vaxination.ca> wrote:
> >> Since HP has targetted VMS to the installed based only, and since the
> >> remaining installed base don't buy many new aplications on VMS and
> >> deploy new stuff on other platforms (at least from HP's viewpoint), my
> >> guess is that HP doesn't see much of a priority in updating such pages.
>
> >> Since HP thinks all that is left of VMS are large customers, it would
> >> conclude that such customers would have relationships with their
> >> existing software vendors and would know if their alpha based
> >> application has been ported to that IA64 thing or not.
>
> >> Such a page had some marketing interest from HP a few years ago when it
> >> was trying to prop up Itanic by showing growth in number of available
> >> applications. Now, HP doesn't care much about propping up Itanic anymore
> >> so such pages have less importance.
>
> >> When you have limited resources, there are other areas of higher
> >> priority than updating such a page.
>
> > If that is all true,
>
> That is a major *IF*.
>
> > then why did HP give priority to a Gartner report
> > that says that third-party software is the critical issue in timing
> > and planning a migration?
>
> You might use any source you like to make you own opinion about
> VMS (and HP's view of VMS), but I'm not sure that JF is the best
> source (anymore).
>

It was November of 2008 when I first wondered why the OpenVMS roadmap
hadn't been updated for some time. I asked the same questions here (in
December IIRC) and was privately contacted by several people telling
me to shut up because my questions could hurt retirement payouts of HP
employees working in OpenVMS engineering (I didn't learn about
outsourcing to India until a month or two after that)

So check this out:
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/pdf/openvms_roadmaps.pdf
This roadmap was published in March-2009 and, as always, it contains a
caveat about changing every 3 months (so I guess they missed June and
September). But notice that the openvms/roadmap directory (which
contained old roadmaps) has been remapped to a single file. I'm not
complaining here; just commenting about HP's relaxed handling of this
product. Oh well, out of sight (exported elsewhere) out of mind.

NSR