[Info-vax] BASIC compiler in the hobbyist distribution

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <mk8ae9$ove$1 at dont-email.me>,
	Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh at hoffmanlabs.invalid> writes:
> On 2015-05-28 23:26:16 +0000, David Froble said:
> 
>> seasoned_geek wrote:
>>> On Thursday, May 28, 2015 at 1:50:52 PM UTC-5, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> 
>>>> That was my point.  Is Solaris even relevant in today's IT world?
>>>> If I were VSI I would not waste time trying to determine how to 
>>>> "compete" with Solaris.  And AIX while still doing OK is really a very 
>>>> niche product and probably not really a competitor anymore.
> 
> Ayup.  I'd expect those AIX folks to head to Linux or to System z, if 
> they decided to port off of the current POWER systems.  Some few might 
> go to Solaris or BSD or to some other Unix.

Most of the ones I know (including a very large government installation)
are perfectly happy where they are and have no plans to go anywhere else.

> 
>>> Actually worth it, more so than chasing the "free" market at this 
>>> point. The people in those particular niches, particularly AIX and 
>>> AS/400, have real business needs and have been able to justify spending 
>>> of significant cash to service those needs.
> 
> So you're suggesting that the AIX folks port from a Unix system to 
> OpenVMS?   The port starts out as pretty much a rewrite.  Without 
> access to the Unix compatibility tools and to the various open source 
> tools and libraries you've been objecting to, things get yet more 
> difficult.

Beleive it or not, the last AIX site I worked at could easily port to
VMS as there is nothing in their portfiolio that is uniquely VMS.  It
was a COBOL/ORACLE DB shop.  over a hundred COBOL programs and a massive
Database. (among other things, think of a database that tracks every
single piece of hardware, right down to washers, on a naval vessel!)
The only unixy stuff were a few shell scripts to launch COBOL programs.

> 
> As for the folks presently on AS/400, that's not at all Unix like and 
> definitely not OpenVMS-like, so that's pretty much a rewrite, too — 
Yeah, but it would all be in high level languages and probably trivial to
port.  Do they still run RPG on iSystems?

> OpenVMS doesn't have the concept of objects.   Much easier for those 
> folks to continue using or to upgrade to POWER / System i boxes.
> 
> In either case, rewrites which are not going to happen in any 
> sufficiently large quantities; in quantities large enough or quick 
> enough to matter.

That is the crux of the matter.  Beyond existing customers their market
is likely totaly new systems, not canabalizing customers from other
companies.

> 
>>> The "free" market has a habit of not paying anyone. I mean they think 
>>> it is ok to have servers which have 4 hour outages each year,
> 
> A total of 1% of the Lenovo x86-64 servers from that survey had four 
> hours outages or more.
> 
> 99% of the Lenovo servers did better than that; had less downtime.
> 
> That's from what you linked, BTW.

And other people not using Lenovo do even better.  As I pointed out, 
I don't have failures here.  I am doing rolling upgrades now (in
preparation for my immenent departure) and the primary reason for
this is upgrading disk drives from generic to NAS/Server class disks.
I am replacing one machine.  Not because of a failure or fear of an
impending one but because the box is so old it is the last system
we have that is not rack-mountable and I really wanted to get it off
the floor of the computer room before leaving.  And it is our main
fileserver which has run 24/7/365 for its entire life except for the
move from the old building th the new science center 3 years ago.
Oh yeah, and total downtime to move the entire user filesystem from
the old box to the new box and make the physical swap for all the
client machines took less than a half hour.  

> 
>>>  so, how is one going to sell them something which runs 24x7 for 
>>> decades without down time?
> 
> One Egg One Basket designs have been fading out, thankfully.  
> Replicating and clustering are well-established, and work.

Damn, you know my secret.  I use replicated file servers.  It allows
for backups without having to keep users off the system, frequent
incremental backups and shortly, keeping an equally current backup
in a remote location.  It also allowed for a quick rotation of boxes
by slipping the new server into the cycle and letting it become current
before making the switchover.  

> 
>>> A much easier sell to tell the AIX and AS/400 crowd, hey, your boxes 
>>> were supposed to kill the VAX, it is still here. We have 24x7 up-time 
>>> measured in decades with ongoing development and you're looking at End 
>>> Of Life for your current platform, here is how you port...
> 
> The instructions are going to involve learning a wholly new platform, 
> and rewriting some or all of the not-COBOL and not-Fortran code 
> involved in the applications, and sorting out more than a few file and 
> database differences.  Which may well be a rewrite measured in decades, 
> for some folks.

Not to mention the fact that they will fall on the floor laughing at
the "24x7 up-time measured in decades" comment.  And i certainly don't
know in what alternate reality he came up with "End Of Life for your
current platform".  IBM isn't EOLing AIX or iSystems.

> 
>> I'm thinking that VSI knows who their customers are.  Check the map  :-)
>> 
>> Their best bet is to service their customers.
> 
> Ayup.   The existing customers and vendors.   Certainly for the 
> foreseeable future.
> 
>> A really bad bet would be to go after IBM, again, which is part of how 
>> we got to where we are now.
> 
> Ayup.  But then I'm also wondering what sort of hardware seasoned_geek 
> would be going after these IBM customers with, here.  Probably not with 
> Oracle SPARC.  Beyond Kittson, probably not Intel Itanium.  ARM isn't 
> fast enough (yet?).  POWER?  That would be going after IBM and IBM 
> users on their own home hardware turf.   That'd involve an OpenVMS 
> port, and then making a really tough marketing case.
 
VMS has a lot in its favor.  Sadly, this light has been hidden under a
bushel for a very long time.  Maybe (hopefully) a revival of marketing
can expand its market share.  Only time will tell.  But I honestly
believe that until it is available on the x86-64 architecture its only
market is going to remain existing customers.  In order to win new
customers it is going to have to be and be able to market itself as
something new, not a legacy dating back to the VAX.  Perception Is
Reality.  If you want neew customers you need to demonstrate (and market)
to them that this is not the same legacy OS that was ignored by its
owners for so many decades.  Anything is possible.

bill
 

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>