[Info-vax] September 6, 2016 - new Roadmap and State of the Port updates now on VSI website

[Chris]

On 09/11/16 14:49, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
> On 2016-09-11 13:33:38 +0000, Chris said:
>
>> On 09/11/16 00:36, David Froble wrote:
>>
>>> If people want to port *ix software, fine, no problem. But, when I
>>> get a bit testy is when they start to blame any issues on VMS, and
>>> not on the original product that would appear to have been written
>>> without any concern for portability.
>>
>> Systems don't exist in isolation, but depend on all the surrounding
>> infrastructure.
>> ...
>> It's now at the stage where the industry and users take it for granted
>> that open source packages will be available for the os they are using.
>
> The operating system has become a "bag of drivers" and "just another
> dependency".
>
> This is at the core of VM-based guests, of app stacking, and of server
> and application hosting and re-hosting.
>
> The fewer differences and fewer dependences I have for (or I need for)
> my applications, the better. Consolidation.
>
>

Consolidation, right. Computing is no longer the face into the wind,
hair shirt profession it was years ago, where everything significant
took hours or even days to achieve, often for little result and at vast
expense. Hardware is commodity now, cheap and has reached a plateau in
performance terms. The real differentiator is in the software that
runs on it. Just about every function imaginable is available in
open source package form, with or without paid support at various
levels. It's a vast resource which has turned the traditional software
vendor business model on it's head.

One way for VSI to leverage entry into that area would be to build
the compatibility layer, plus the package tools, manage and host
the package repositories, then let the users / os movement handle
the creation and maintenance of the packages. Just as is done for
every other mainstream OS these days. I really don't see how VMS can
be anything other than niche product without it...

Chris