[Info-vax] VMS and the Internet of Things (IoT)

[Kerry Main]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Info-vax [mailto:info-vax-bounces at rbnsn.com] On
> Behalf Of Simon Clubley via Info-vax
> Sent: 11-Sep-16 1:56 PM
> To: info-vax at rbnsn.com
> Cc: Simon Clubley
> <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP>
> Subject: Re: [Info-vax] VMS and the Internet of Things
> (IoT)
> 
> On 2016-09-11, Kerry Main <kemain.nospam at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > The OpenVMS of the past with HP and its expensive
> licenses on
> > proprietary, expensive HW designed to compete with
> Solaris and AIX
> > should not be compared to OpenVMS on X86-64
> (possibly ARM??) with a
> > new TCPIP stack, new file system, new security
features
> and
> > (hopefully) a new licensing model with V9+ versions
> designed to
> > compete with other OS's on the X86-64 platform.
> >
> 
> I'm confused. Are you suggesting that VMS can occupy the
> middle tier
> in my 3 tier model and be the OS that runs inside the
> controller box
> which is located within the facility itself and which
talks
> directly
> to the sensors ?
> 
> If that's the case, I'm curious how much embedded
> knowledge you have
> because I am absolutely not seeing VMS as being suitable
> for that
> position for these reasons:
> 
> 1) It would have to run on ARM for one thing (x86-64 is
so
> overpowered
> by comparison, and with power and hardware space
> requirements to match,
> that it would be like using a supercomputer to calculate
> your payroll),
> 

You missed my earlier comment in this thread - 

" My references to OpenVMS and IoT were in respect to
OpenVMS and future architectures - coming (X86-64) and
potential (ARM). This would be post OpenVMS V9+ (ARM -
V10?) - after the new file system and new TCPIP stack.
X86-64 in small boxes/appliances are valid thin "smart"
clients just as much as lower power ARM devices in even
smaller thin client "smart" devices are likely. "

[snip..]


Regards,

Kerry Main
Kerry dot main at starkgaming dot com