[Info-vax] Unix on A DEC Vax?

[Howard S Shubs]

In article <kdbjbj$srm$1 at dont-email.me>,
 Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh at hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:

> On 2013-01-18 03:49:30 +0000, Howard S Shubs said:
> 
> > In article <kda3ji$9a0$1 at dont-email.me>,
> >  Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh at hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
> > 
> >> As for the emulation market, the folks that are choosing emulation will
> >> likely continue to use it until the application(s) age out, or the
> >> management involved ages out, or the organization gets clobbered by
> >> competition.  But those folks are probably not going to be doing very
> >> much with the applications running under emulation, as that's usually
> >> viewed as a dead-end for new investments, even within the organizations.
> >> 
> >> Hardware emulation is computing's version of the cover band.  Sometimes
> >> fun.  Variously useful.  But not really what most folks want.
> > 
> > Perhaps not, but sometimes it's all you can have.  Such as when the
> > software manufacturer has gone defunct, or might as well have (VMS port
> > to x86, anyone?).  Unless someone can get HP to release source code.
> 
> Or in another way of looking at this, your organization decided to use 
> non-portable features and/or platform-specific software, and for your 
> own code you decided not to isolate the use of platform-specific 
> features, and you decided to not invest in maintaining and updating and 
> portability; you decided that an external dependency was an acceptable 
> risk.

So few companies put themselves in this position, after all.  What 
ACTUALLY happened was that when the writing was on the wall, MOST of 
them were able to port away.  Others had management and budgeting issues 
and have, as you said, painted themselves into a corner.


> You're asking about DSSI disks for VAX servers in another recent 
> posting.  If that's related to this, then consider the proverbial 
> writing was on the wall for VAX in 1992 or so, with the advent of 
> Alpha.  There's very little business-critical "stuff" that can't be 
> ported in twenty years.

No, that's just for a VAX I've got sitting here.


> Steve Jobs wasn't fond of dependencies on outside organizations and 
> entities, as the other vendors could choose to cancel or retarget the 
> products[1], or potentially held ransom.  If your dependencies are more 
> portable or are available from multiple sources, you're much harder to 
> derail.  Is that the cheapest approach over the short term?  No.  But 
> is this the cheapest over a longer term?  Very possibly yes.

Damn straight.  And the longer you wait to move to a new system, the 
more expensive it gets.  There are no new VMS people.  If your company 
needs VMS people, you're going to pay for the privilege.  Smart people 
moved away from VMS quite some time ago, and aren't willing to work in 
the past for less than serious money.

Anyone who goes with a proprietary, general-purpose, operating system 
now is a slow learner.

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Those who eat natural foods die of natural causes. - Kperspective