[Info-vax] Chinese Alpha?

[David Froble]

Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 5/3/2012 5:54 PM, David Froble wrote:
>> It makes me wonder how the product line would have prospered if DEC has
>> made the business decision to continue the VAX product line, not the
>> large ones, (but I could be mistaken with that choice), just the MV3100
>> type of systems. Go for low cost to manufacture, generic components,
>> upgrades as computer components changes, ie; S-ATA disks, memory SIMMs,
>> power supplies, and such. Sell the OS at some minimal price, or just
>> include it with the system. Perhaps it would have stopped some customers
>> from migrating to PC based systems, if they had some confidence in being
>> able to continue to get new systems for their needs.
> 
> It would have reduced Alpha sales, which at the time of the
> decision had a chance.
> 
> And in the end it would not have made much of a difference. VMS's
> problem is not that VAX is no longer. Applications are what matters.
> 
> Arne
> 

Ok, applications matter.

Consolidated Data has a rather extensive application that runs on VMS.  In my opinion, it 
cannot be ported to any other OS.  It can be re-written, with much expense, and loss of 
features most likely.  But not ported.  Quite frankly, maybe I'm just stupid, but I cannot 
see any justification for blowing $50 million and not getting anything for doing so.

There used to be many manufacturing customers that used VMS.  There must have been reasons 
why they used VMS.  I'm sure that they were not interested in moving to another OS, if 
they had any choice.  It wasn't cheap, and it wasn't the business they were/are in.

As for the "reduce Alpha sales" bullshit, I've read it before, and it's just as stupid, or 
more, now as it was then.  When a vendor starts telling a customer what they're going to 
get, instead of asking what they want, that vendor will soon have no customers.

So, from a particular perspective, what killed Alpha?  Perhaps VAX ??