[Info-vax] Reimplementing VMS, was: Re: HP adds OpenVMS Mature Product Support beyond the end of Standard Support

[David Froble]

JF Mezei wrote:
> On 14-02-03 12:10, David Froble wrote:
>> Where did you ever get an idea that Intel would ever be liable to HP for 
>> any porting?
> 
> 
> Because when a chip vendor strikes a deal to gain a new important
> customer, there are negotiations to provide some porting help.
> 
> This happened when DEC made the 1990s agreement with Intel which
> included porting help to port DEC Unix to IA64.
> 
> This happened when Compaq killed Alpha and got funding from Intel to
> help fund the port of VMS, DEC-Unix (continued effort) and NSK to itanium.

THAT. was in my opinion, Intel's way to help kill off a competitor.

> This happened when Apple signed the deal to move to Intel.
> 
> 
> So, when negotiating the end of IA64, HP would have undoubtedly
> negotiated with Intel to see what type of porting help could be obtained
> to help port the operating systems from the stranded IA64 platform.

Since you claim that HP is paying Intel to produce IA-64, then Intel 
will lose that money because HP is giving up on it's products.  To then 
pay HP on top of that loss ???????????

> This does not imply that Intel is "liable" for anything, nor does it
> imply expectations of full funding for a port.
> 
> Just because VMS is being killed does not mean that HP did not try to
> see how much it could get from Intel for such a port.
> 
> 
> 

They can try, but I think all they'd get is laughed at ....