[Info-vax] HP wins Oracle Itanium case

[JF Mezei]

Stephen Hoffman wrote:

> RMS was a great idea well into the 1980s.   And it's a marvelously 
> well-engineered system.  But it's really gotten quite feature-stale in 
> the ensuing decades. 

Doesn't that apply to VMS in general ?  When they updated ODS to have
ODS5, they added support for "text" file names, but the DCL interfaces
were terrible.

>From the "learning from history", it would be interesting to know
whether this was due to insufficient budgets, or whether it was really
the software technlogy/architecture that had reached its limit and
improvements had to be kludgy o matter how much money would be poored
into it.

And if it had hit a technoogical roadblock, could VMS have added support
for a new file system which could have co-existed with the old one to
allow customer to transition ?


I look at what Apple is able to achieve in terms of new software and
changes to its 2 operating systems every year, and one can see that
given infinite(*) budgets, you can accomplish anything you want.

Imagine if VMS had been given similar budgets for improvements
after the port to Alpha was done. It seems to me that after the port to
Apha was done, development efforts were reduced.