[Info-vax] OpenVMS in the future, Open sourced or Closed? Intent is to keep it...

[Neil Rieck]

On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 9:35:03 AM UTC-4, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
> On 2015-05-05 12:04:40 +0000, Neil Rieck said:
> 
> > Let's put our cards on the table. The number one reason why people want 
> > Open-Source software is because its free. But is it really free? 
> > Companies like RedHat start with Open-Source software then curate it 
> > into something supportable. When any person or company wants to use 
> > supported software from RedHat, they buy a support license for RHEL. 
> > When those same people want to use unsupported software they might 
> > "take their chances with CentOS"
> 
> There are various reasons why folks want open source.  Yes, many will 
> want it because it is cheaper to acquire.  Whether it is cheaper to run 
> can vary.   For other folks, it's a way that can avoid a dependency on 
> an outside provider that might disappear, or a way to allow the 
> end-user to modify the source code themselves.  In some cases, it's 
> because that's what the end-user's tools and packages are based on -- 
> I'm encountering ever-longer chains of dependencies when porting code 
> over to OpenVMS, for instance.  Open source packages that are already 
> integrated into other distributions.  Then there's that some of the 
> open source code is better and more flexible than much of the closed 
> source code -- llvm is an example of this.  Very few folks have the 
> budget and the time and the staff necessary to create and debug a 
> ground-zero modular compiler, after all -- this makes migrating 
> beneficial.   But yes, many folks like free.  In the case of open 
> source, free can sometimes be a competitive weapon, or a palliative for 
> end-user concerns over business viability, too.
> 
> Technically, OpenVMS is already sort-of kind-of open source -- again, 
> "open source" is an exceedingly ambiguous statement -- as you can 
> purchase a copy of the source listings.  Years ago, you could buy a 
> copy of the sources, too -- that was expensive.    Key features such as 
> the security implementation and the kernel are included in the source 
> listings, as well as in the source kit.   Hopefully VSI continues with 
> the source listing offering, and it'd certainly be appreciated if VSI 
> lowered the price of their version of the source listings distribution, 
> too.  But I digress.
> 
> > p.s. Android is a curated version of LinuxWe all have memories of VMS 
> > software being very expensive (some say that this is the reason why "$" 
> > is the default prompt for DCL). Software prices dropped when 
> > VMS/OpenVMS came under control of Compaq. Prices dropped even lower 
> > when everything moved to HP. During the last 40 years, "the business 
> > model" moved from "very expensive with free updates for life" to "less 
> > expensive to buy" and "additional support (including patches) 
> > optionally available to those requiring it".
> 
> That's been the whole software market, and a good chunk of the hardware 
> market, too.   One copy of software is expensive.  After that, the 
> copies are not so expensive.    Fully amortized, custom servers and 
> custom microprocessors were and are hugely expensive and very risky -- 
> high-volume designs and standard designs (x86, ARM) have much less risk 
> and much lower costs -- and the custom designs are seldom sufficiently 
> better to warrant the extra costs inherent in lower volumes.
> 
> > Now I have no idea why HP outsourced OpenVMS support to India but 
> > clearly that did not work out.
> 
> Outsourced?  No.   OpenVMS has been developed by folks working all over 
> the world.  Back in the DEC days two of the major clusters of folks 
> working on OpenVMS were in Nashua and Bengaluru (Bangalore).   There 
> were other clusters, such as file system work in the UK, for instance.  
>  Back in the early-mid 1990s, I first started working with some parts 
> of OpenVMS that were being maintained and enhanced by the then-DEC 
> OpenVMS engineers from Bengaluru, and they'd been around and working on 
> OpenVMS rather longer than that.   (The timing and timezones on mail 
> messages and bug report discussions could provide a hint of where the 
> DEC engineer you were working with was based.  But then some of the DEC 
> engineers also kept unusual hours, too.  It was also common to work 
> directly with some folks at DEC for five or ten years or longer, and to 
> have not met them in person -- national symposia or regional marketing 
> events might be the first time you actually met a Digit you'd been 
> emailing with for years.   But I digress.  Again.)   In short, HP did 
> not outsource OpenVMS.
> 
> > Thankfully, a new arrangement was made with VSI, who then hired some 
> > very talented people with a passion for products in this niche.
> 
> VSI licensed OpenVMS from HP.   VSI is the exclusive world-wide 
> licensee for new OpenVMS versions, or some such.
> 
> HP Bengaluru is still working on and is still supporting OpenVMS for 
> HP, for V8.4 and earlier.
> 
> > So if costs are a concern, you could get a quote for new licenses from 
> > "Island Computers" (I just got one and they are lower than you would 
> > think) then decide if you need a support contract from either VSI or HP 
> > (at the time of this writing I am not aware of any pay-walls at VSI so 
> > would "assume" that if you signed an agreement with them (VSI), they 
> > would get you access to HP's patch maintenance site)
> 
> AIUI / AFAIK / YMMV ...  Hopefully this all gets documented and clarified...
> 
> Once the release is available, you'll get a license for the V8.4-1H1 
> hardware release, and you'll get patches for V8.4-1H1, if you purchase 
> from VSI.   AFAIK, you will not get HP patches for earlier releases nor 
> for other architectures from VSI.  That's all from HP.
> 
> HP will (re)sell and provide front-line support for OpenVMS V8.4-1H1 on 
> their Poulson (i4) servers.  HP is a reseller of VSI products, and 
> specifically for VSI OpenVMS on the HP Poulson (i4) servers, and HP 
> will offer front-line support for V8.4-1H1 on Poulson (i4) for those 
> folks.
> 
> Upgrading to V8.4-1H1 (again, once it is available) may or may not be 
> appropriate -- it's only necessary should you want to move to VSI 
> support and/or you want Poulson (i4) server support. This particularly 
> given that V8.4-1H1 is a hardware release, and does not particularly 
> add new features or new software support.   Now the next and more 
> general VSI release, that will be more interesting.    Whatever that 
> might be, and whenever that arrives.
> 
> AFAIK, HP will only be providing front-line support for V8.4-1H1 on 
> Poulson (i4) servers, as well.   Other front-line support and 
> escalation support is from VSI.   Hopefully this all becomes clear once 
> V8.4-1H1 is shipping.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC

Lots of stuff to respond to but I think you misread one of my statements. HP did outsource "OpenVMS support" to India. 

Before that time, it appeared as if all the work was being done in North America as were all the webinars. After that event, L1 support still appeared to be done from an organization/server in Colorado while L3 work was split between North America and India (I think it depended upon the product). 95% of the webinars were hosted from India with one being hosted from New Zealand.
 
Neil Rieck 
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.