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

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

Neil Rieck skrev den 2015-05-09 15:50:
> 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.
>

As long as it says "HP" on the badge, it is not "outsourced".
Where on the globe people have their office is irrelevant.

I'm sure that HP has outsourced a lot of things *in* the US,
such as cleaning and other things not done by HP personell.





> 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.
>
>