[Info-vax] Kittson question

[JF Mezei]

On 15-01-02 12:46, Stanley F. Quayle wrote:

> No, it doesn't. Check out www.stanq.com/wf1.html  They saved floor space, power, and air conditioning. They improved performance greatly.


In cases where the customer wants you to perfectly and completely mimic
their current VAX down to device names etc, is this not an indication
that the customer no longer has in-house VMS maintenance expertise and
prefers to pay you more to mimic the environment so no changes need to
be made ?

In a situation where someone setting up a new VMS box on that new
architecture I can't name,  wouldn't that imply an active VMS site with
in-house expertise who would be able to move their last VAX apps onto
any emulated instance and change device/disk names if needed ?

In other words, when looking at providing emulated VAX-VMS support on
the new VMS, is it really necessary to be able to mimic every different
VAX model with every different config ? Wouldn't a generic VAX emulation
based on one of the last VAX models be more than enough since anyone
setting it up will have the knowledge to tailor their VAX-VMS apps ?

Being able to set model name for license purposes is different, I am
talking about the actual emulation software and the hardware it
virtually creates.