[Info-vax] Moving away from OpenVMS

[David Froble]

JF Mezei wrote:
> Keith Parris wrote:
> 
>> So there doesn't seem to be a need for panic at this point.
> 
> While I have no probem believing that HP will continue to accept support
> dollars for both hardware and software, the issue becomes that of a
> stale operating system in maintenance mode with no new or updated
> applications on it.
> 
> Currently, HP and its employees continue to pretend all is well and that
> both IA64 and VMS are actively developped.
> 
> 
> While the market has accepted that IA64 is dead, HP is still in denial
> mode (and thus its employees who must toe the corporate line)
> 
> Unless employees are allowed to dicuss plans to port VMS to the 8086,
> the only possible outcome is that VMS and HP-UX are coming to a dead end
>  with the end of IA64.

It might be more reasonable to discuss specifics instead of generalities, or, perhaps not.

I've asked myself the question, what would it really take?

"I'd guess that would probably involve thirty senior engineers dedicated to design, 
porting the kernel and related pieces, porting the compilers, plus all of the other 
engineers with specific responsibilities for various components dealing with their own 
pieces."

(Wasn't me, but I'm not going to attribute private correspondence to anyone.)

So, what is the cost of 30 senior engineers for say 4 years?  Since I don't know what a 
"senior engineer" salary might be, I'll just throw out a quarter million per year, keeps 
the math easy, which would come to 30 million for 4 years.

While 30 million would be a nice tidy sum for me, or you, I doubt it's unsurmountable for 
a large corporation.

So unless VMS is considered rather worthless, which I personally will not accept, then we 
perhaps have some rough idea of the cost.  As to who might wish to foot the bill, well, 
that could be interesting.

Perhaps some group of large users might consider it less costly to pay for the port to x86 
than to migrate their applications to another platform.  Perhaps VMS bigots could 
contribute to a porting fund.  I'm sure others could come up with all kinds of ideas.  If 
it wasn't strictly HP, then perhaps a more user friendly list of supported hardware might 
occur.

One consideration might be whether HP wants VMS to survive.  Would they allow such a port 
of their property.  Perhaps we all write our congressmen and have the US government "lean" 
on HP a bit.  Other wild-ass ideas are solicited ....

As for the benefits.  The way I see it, x86 is going to be with us for a while.  It's 
entrenched enough that I cannot imagine (though I think it's possible and will happen in 
time) what it would take to replace x86.  So, VMS on x86 would be as viable as anything 
else for the next 25 years.

I've got to wonder what HP will pay to develop their x86 based SuperDomes or whatever.