[Info-vax] Building for Customers, Revenue

[David Froble]

Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote:
> In article <lv1mer$vjf$1 at dont-email.me>, David Froble
> <davef at tsoft-inc.com> writes: 
> 
>> Not the same thing.  A port to x86 allows a future for VMS.  A future 
>> for something unique.  On the other hand, there are plenty of desktop 
>> environments now available, and they do a much better job than a VMS 
>> based desktop.  That of course depends on the applications, but, you're 
>> talking about browsers.
> 
> But there is no intrinsic reason why they are better; they've just had 
> more development.

They and VMS are what they are, TODAY.  That's reality.  Coulda, woulda, 
shoulda just don't matter.  Things didn't happen, and that's reality.

>>> I would hope so.  But many at VSI, and many customers, remember "desktop 
>>> to datacenter".  I think that's still a good idea today.
>> And some may also "remember" living in the cave ....
> 
> Some of us are still quite happy there: http://www.tmesis.com/vaxcave/ :-)

I'll believe that when I see an analysis of the material in the walls

>>> I don't think that VSI should compete against "regular" desktops, but 
>>> rather offer enough desktop support so that VMS folks don't have to run 
>>> something else just for desktop stuff.
>> Specifics ???
> 
> These days, that means a browser and little else: http://xkcd.com/934/ :-|
> 
>>>> There just aren't enough Phillip-like customers in the world.
>>> I don't know.  Just a few weeks ago, anyone who thought that there would 
>>> be a viable port of VMS to x86, or even Poulson support, in the 
>>> foreseeable future would have been deemed delusional.  :-)
>> That is true.  But there are still many using VMS.  How many are still 
>> trying to use VMS on the desktop?  Will you need the fingers of both 
>> hands to count them?
> 
> The point is, if there is a future to VMS, people might like to go back 
> to a VMS desktop, if it is possible.

At what cost, and at what value?

>>> But even if they do, it is a pain to constantly transfer files between 
>>> it and VMS.
>> Ok, you need to defend that statement.  FTP (sorry Steve) does the job. 
>>   I do it all the time.
> 
> Sure, it can be done, but it's an unnecessary complication.
> 

What's so hard about $ FTP /<destination> <filename> <destination 
filename> ????????

Well, maybe a bit more complex, but not much ...