[Info-vax] Happy new Year !

[H Vlems]

On 5 jan, 10:23, Michael Kraemer <M.Krae... at gsi.de> wrote:
> H Vlems schrieb:
>
> > As for seamless integration, VMS is quite good at maintaining data and
> > databases. There was an Affinity program once,
> > a vision of Windows NT worksations and VMS fileservers. In practice
> > this didn't work too well owing to the differences
> > in the filesystems at both ends.
>
> Such things never work well.
> It means that one has to maintain two environments
> instead of one. And of course the "workstations"
> outnumber the servers and they run the important apps
> (mail and word processing). So giving up on VMS workstations
> results in NT on both, client and server.

Yes, that's what happens in the real world. Assuming that filesystem
integration between Windows and VMS would be flawless,
then this two architeture setup will always fail the demand for
standardization.
At Fuji we ran around 1000 Windows 95 clients with 4 pathworks servers
on Alpha/VMS servers, the protocol was DECnet.
Seamless integration with the production environment (VMS and RSX-11M
+) and bookkeeping (CICS on an IBM mainframe, via a DECnet/SNA
gateway).
Moving the pathworks environment to Windows and TCP/IP made everything
a lot more complicated and performance suffered seriously.
However NT on Alpha did improve file access for the clients.
Hans