[Info-vax] IT shops call on HP and Oracle to kiss and make up

[Bob Koehler]

In article <0dWdne__6Y2mVBDTnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d at earthlink.com>, "John Reagan" <johnrreagan at earthlink.net> writes:
> 
> From TFA:
> "OpenVMS, in particular, would be a messy operating system to port,
> Eunice said. “I call it a ‘guts-exposed’ operating system; it doesn’t
> have much of an abstraction layer to simplify the movement to a new
> chipset." Plus, OpenVMS has been ported several times already over the
> course of its 30-plus-year history, he pointed out. It started out
> life on the VAX, then moved to the DEC Alpha chip, and finally to
> Itanium. "The prospect of another port is unpalatable,” Eunice said."
> 
> 
> Somewhere I remember a comment about the port to Itainum resulting in
> less hardware dependence, though not a flat out HAL (hardware
> abstraction layer).
> Or is that a hopeful fantasy on my part?
> 

   Yeah, the comment is a load of bull.  Did multiple ports somehow
   make UNIX unportable?  Were they responsible for the late 60's era
   kernel design, the troublesome security model, or the late 60's era 
   user interface?

   VMS Engineering has said that the common source used for Alpha and 
   IA64 has become much less dependent on hardware and much more 
   portable (said before VMS Engineering moved to the new team in India).
   I tend to believe them over Eunice.

   I don't see any killer technical issues with a port to x86, for
   example.  But the vendor's ability to kill the product through
   lack of interest makes it hard for them to justify the expense.