[Info-vax] Moonshot

[David Froble]

Stephen Hoffman wrote:

> On 2015-01-06 09:17:21 +0000, Matthew H McKenzie said:

> For those that need that.  But there's a divergence happening, here.  
> Where the hardware and the cores are outstripping what many folks need. 
>   For those that like their own metal where they can touch it (TaaS™), 
> the available servers can be massively more capable than necessary.  
> More than a few of the available server cores are idle, in most places. 
>  Sure, there'll be any number of folks looking to consolidate onto 
> denser boxes.  Over time.  Incrementally.

Now, it's well known that I don't get out much, so consider that.

The question that I have is what is the real demand for the huge systems 
being discussed here?  Sure, there is google and Amazon, and some 
others.  But it appears that some of these are going their own way. 
Perhaps no business for a vendor to sell into.

So, back to "real demand".  What percentage of computer users have any 
need or use for such large systems?  None of the users I'm working with. 
  Note initial disclaimer above.

Are some of the advances advantageous to many users?  I'd thing so.  But 
as mentioned, some users can get by with a rather small configuration. 
The advances in speed and storage capacity have resolved most of their 
needs.

Getting back to VMS.  From my rather restricted perspective, if VMS was 
supported, supported current tools, supported current HW, and wasn't 
missing anything rather needful, I think it would satisfy the needs of 
most users, and would be successful.  Even with some of the warts.