[Info-vax] BASIC compiler in the hobbyist distribution

[JF Mezei]

On 15-05-30 14:46, lists at openmailbox.org wrote:

> I think it might be worth it because of the reasons I mentioned. A premium
> OS has to run on premium hardware.

And proper 8086 servers are premium hardware. You do pay a premium to
have enterprise component quality and features. Look at disks for
instance. Enterprise disks are rated with higher MTBFs values, rated for
7/24 operation etc.

You'll find that good enterprise servers have similar features and
compomnents (power supplies, fans etc) irrespective of the CPU.


> you can't sell something, raise the price. If VMS runs on Intel then VMS
> has to differentiate from other OS running on Intel 

Irrespective of hardware, VMS has to differeniate itslelf from "free" Linux.

Consider Apple. It still sells a "server" version of its OS-X it is very
very affordable. However, Apple has made it clear it does not target the
enterprise server market, no longer supports features such as IPMI (even
coded its OS to prevent the Server monitor application from launching
even though it does nothing that is specific to an OS version).

So, despite being affordable. OS-X server is not a player because Apple
is not interested in that market and certainly no business wants to bet
its own business on a platform the vendor is not interested in. This was
also VMS' problem.

VSI solves this problem since its survival depends entirely on the
success of VMS. So it will do what it takes to make V'S succesfull,
unless HP hampers it with retrictions that prevent VSI from innovating
wth business practices.

The success of the rebirth of VMS depends far more on VSI's business
practices and how well VSI takes cars of the customers it acquires than
it does on the 8086. Consider that while IA64 is not the 8086, it is a
liability because everyone knows it is a dead platform. You don't want
to invest in it. The 8086 is NOT a dead platform.