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

[JF Mezei]

On 14-02-04 19:41, David Froble wrote:

> JF is now moving into his "special zone" ....


When HP announced it was buying Compaq and outlined the future of all
major products lines EXCEPT for VMS, I was labeled a kook because I saw
something very wrong with this.  When the Stallard memo came out in May
2002, I was proven right but nobody noticed.

The Stallard memo ended up being extraordinarily accurate depiction of
HP's intentions for VMS. (except for the promise of an 8.* version of
VAX VMS). Hp also broke later promises of VMS having long life on IA64
when it will die before IA64.

I seem to be good at spotting executives being forced to speak very
carefully. Like Livermore making and pause after promising development
and trying to gain market share for HP-UX and NSK, and continuing in a
different tone, to promise to cater to the VMS intalled base to keep
them happy. And because I seem to be the only one capable of noticing
this, I get labeled as a kook.

I've got news for you: HP KILLED VMS. Or perhaps because the statement
comes from me, you don't believe it and still think VMS has a bright
future ahead and that HP will continue to fund IA64 beyond Kittson ?

Last year, Bell Canada was attempting to buy Astral (media company). I
noticed a number of "careful" executive statements (and they were being
very careful this time around because in 2012, their request to buyt
Astral had been rejected). I noted those in my presentation and
explained that in a merger, the buyer always assets its identity, and
puts its onw staff at the helm.  The CRTC commissioners wondered what
sort of evidence I had found that this would happen. "because an
executive spoke suspiciously carefully on that subject" is not evidence
a regulator can use.

Yet, all my predictions happened. Some much faster than I had anticipated.