[Info-vax] BASIC compiler in the hobbyist distribution

[johnwallace4 at yahoo.co.uk]

On Saturday, 30 May 2015 19:50:05 UTC+1, li... at openmailbox.org  wrote:
> On Fri, 29 May 2015 14:01:05 -0400
> David Froble via Info-vax <info-vax at rbnsn.com> wrote:
> 
> > lists at openmailbox.org wrote:
> > > On Fri, 29 May 2015 08:30:15 -0400
> > > Stephen Hoffman via Info-vax <info-vax at rbnsn.com> wrote:
> > 
> > big snip ...
> > 
> > > No, I'm proposing a port of OpenVMS to POWER would be well placed in
> > > order to get new business and stay viable as a premium OS. If VMS
> > > stoops to compete with commodity OS on Intel, Linux on Intel will wipe
> > > it out of existence.
> > 
> > That's two things.
> > 
> > First, VMS running on Power might be interesting.  As far as I know, 
> > Power is still faster than x86.  But what do I know.  It would at least 
> > give people an option.  However, I doubt the return on investment would 
> > be worth it.
> 
> I think it might be worth it because of the reasons I mentioned. A premium
> OS has to run on premium hardware. There is a rule of sales that says if
> you can't sell something, raise the price. If VMS runs on Intel then VMS
> has to differentiate from other OS running on Intel or there is no reason
> to believe what's been happening to all the other OS running on Intel won't
> happen to VMS. Linux is blotting out everything else. Cheap wins.
> 
> If you don't want to or can't compete on cheap, and you're able to compete
> on good, then you need to stay away from environments and ecosystems like
> Intel where the battle is for fastest/cheapest.
> 
> 
> > Second, just because VMS runs on x86 doesn't mean that it's trying to 
> > compete with commodity OSs.  That is two separate issues.  Trying to say 
> > one leads to another is not a given.
> 
> I think it is a given because when you target a platform that only
> commodity OS run on, then you're de facto competing with commodity OS. If
> you want to sell Cadillacs you can't sell them on the floor next to
> Hyundais. You need a separate dealership.
> 
> Think about it: the best OS have most often been closely coupled to premium
> hardware platforms. And even the best commercial UNIX have been built to
> run on platforms that were built more or less for the best performance and
> reliability of that OS, like Solaris on SPARC, Irix on MIPS, and HP/UX on
> HP 9000s, etc. Intel has been a platform for people for whom cost is an
> issue. It has much historical burden. It's ugly as sin. It's not a premium
> platform, on the contrary it's cheap and widely available- even though you
> CAN spend tons of money on "high-end" Intel-based servers you don't have
> to. It's all more or less the same crapwware because it comes down to
> the CPU and ISA which is a junk ISA.
> 
> There is nothing expensive running on Intel at this moment that isn't in
> the process of being displaced by Linux. There are some much better OS than
> Linux running on Intel but that doesn't matter. What matters is cheap.
> 
> > I remember the PDP 11/40.  Compared to today's commodity HW, the 11/40 
> > was much less.  Crapware doesn't even begin to describe the difference. 
> 
> That isn't really relevant. A basis for comparison would be what were the
> available minis and how did they compare to the 11/40 and the other PDP-11
> family members? I'm not familiar with PDP equipment so I have nothing to
> say except it is axiomatic anything today runs faster than anything made
> yesterday. But faster is not always better enough. And fast is not
> necessarily equal to good. Sure, fast is important. But if you don't have a
> lot of other stuff than fast by itself is not enough.
> 
> -- 
> Please DO NOT COPY ME on mailing list replies. I read the mailing list.
> RSA 4096 fingerprint 7940 3F02 16D3 AFEE F2F8  ACAA 557C 4B36 98E4 4D49

[started typing this before JF's related stuff became visible]

What, specifically, does 'x86' mean in the streams of abuse it's
getting round here at the moment?

What follows is a request for clarification, not an attempt to
religiously defend x86 (it's already a dead-end architecture, 
surviving largely because of its association with Windows, but
it's probably got quite a few years yet).

Back to basics: the term x86 probably defines an instruction set
architecture. That's what I'm going to use it to mean anyway.

Various chips implement the x86 ISA, from (various) Centrino to
(various) Xeon and many others in between and alongside whose names
and distinguishing features are generally of little interest to me or
probably to most readers here, but are of major interest to the
Intel world.

The details of these chips might start to be of interest to readers
here when VSI start talking detail about new hardware for VMS. The
details of the systems incorporating them will also be interesting...

Various systems incorporate x86 chips as per above. More accurately
these days, they incorporate AMD64 chips and their Intel derivatives.

Is it seriously being suggested here that there's no significant
difference in business class suitability between a sensible Proliant
server system at one end, and at the other end a consumer-centric
box with e.g. a Packard Bell badge, just because they're both 'x86'
based and both capable of running some flavours of Windows?

The Proliant will also be qualified to run a couple of business
class Linuxes (the Packard Bell? Why?) 

Think about how the *systems* compare:
. Resilient (Proliant) vs cheap (consumer)
.. e.g. redundant PSU vs single PSU, ECC memory vs non-ECC, etc
. Serviceable (Proliant) vs disposable (consumer)
. Expandable (Proliant) vs bounded (consumer)
. Documented (Proliant) vs 'good luck with that, mate' (consumer)
. Expected lifetime of years (Proliant) vs months (consumer)
. Multiple OS multiple version support (Proliant) vs you get what
you're given and that's it (consumer)


I note you mention Solaris and SPARC. The Solaris folk seemed quite
happy with AMD64 when it came along. They didn't see it as irrelevant
simply because of its x86 origins.

What am I missing? Enquiring minds might want to better understand
where you're coming from. 

Have a lot of fun.