[Info-vax] HP Integrity rx2800 i4 (2.53GHz/32.0MB) :: PAKs won't load

[Stephen Hoffman]

On 2016-02-28 16:54:00 +0000, Kerry Main said:

> I agree cluster and OpenVMS pricing / licensing  in general needs a 
> major re-visit for next gen OpenVMS V9/10+ futures ..

If by "major revisit" you mean "nuke it from orbit", sure.    Outside 
of the installed base, OpenVMS is not competitive.  Whether it's 
pricing or features or the cluster user interface "design" that you so 
desperately keep trying to drag the discussion away from.     The 
accreted "design" being the result of decades of what were very likely 
a series of reasonable decisions at the time, too.

"Which brings me to another point about calling bullshit. The state of 
the art in the Rails world is full of hard-won simplifications. It's 
incredibly easy to devolve and regress from that. While Java certainly 
isn't a pinnacle of language design, it took quite a few years of 
devolution to go from something relatively simple like servlets to the 
steaming pile of shit that is J2EE. And every tiny step of the way 
probably seemed somewhat reasonable at the time to reasonable people.

If we don't call bullshit loud and often against what's perceived as 
putting us on this path of devolution, which imo is the standard 
trajectory of software, then we will end up exactly where they did. In 
Kompleksistan with no map to find our way back."  — David Heinemeier 
Hansson.

OpenVMS is somewhere deep into "Kompleksistan" now, and more than a few 
of those but-it's-compatible features often added to the complexity.   
If folks here learn nothing from the Continuing Adventures of Bill, 
it's this.  There haven't been enough new OpenVMS folks posting around 
here to keep rubbing your respective noses in this mess, either.

> The competition in the future and has been for the last 10+ years is 
> not  Solaris, AIX, z/OS etc, (DEC/Compaq/HP market positioning) but 
> rather  commodity OS's like Linux/Windows. This is especially true when 
> VMS is
> 
> being sold on the same server X86-64 architecture as Windows/Linux.

The competition was not, is not, and will not be— not without a very 
large effort on the part of the talented folks at VSI, and not without 
an even larger effort on the part of third-party providers — OpenVMS, 
either.

> However, like all companies, there is only so much one can do with 
> existing  resources and budgets, so trade-offs and delivery schedules 
> need to have a  balanced perspective.
> 

Yes, though all but a rounding error of those companies — quite 
possibly a sufficiently profitable rounding error, or so VSI expects — 
use other platforms and tools.   And will continue to use those other 
platforms, too.  And the current "design" of the clustering "user 
interface" most certainly won't be a draw for those folks, either.




-- 
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC