[Info-vax] VMS port to x86

[John Wallace]

On Mar 26, 5:20 pm, Jerry Eckert <je... at virtual-vax-alpha.com> wrote:
> On Mar 25, 3:48 am, John Wallace <johnwalla... at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In a commercial setup rather than hobbyist setup, a far greater
> > concern than using one of the multiple cores [often unnecessarily]
> > provided in many modern Window boxes would likely be the reliability
> > and availability of the underlying OS in comparison with the
> > reliability and availability which led to the choice (and retention)
> > of VMS.
>
> If one dedicates a box to the emulation applications, which is the
> recommendation of the vendors, many of the Windows services can be
> disabled.  This provides a significant improvement in the reliability
> of the underlying OS. Since Windows network connectivity is for
> management only, in most cases it should be possible to isolate it
> from general network traffic, reducing exposure to the network
> security vulnerabilities.
>
> Another option is not to run the emulator under Windows.  vtAlpha's
> bare metalapproach, which is a bundled Linux kernel, works well
> because the underlying OS is shipped stripped down and tested with the
> application; there is no issue with OS upgrades applied on-site
> introducing incompatabilities.

"vtAlpha's bare metalapproach, which is a bundled Linux kernel"

Oh dear, not that silliness again. Not running Windows may be better
than running Windows, but running a Linux layer underneath the
emulator doesn't make it a "bare metal" emulator.

Why is it so difficult for IT people to be honest these days?

HYPErvisor. With the emphasis on the first four letters.