[Info-vax] Updated HPE/VSI OpenVMS V8.4-2L1 Marketing Brochures

[johnwallace4 at yahoo.co.uk]

On Saturday, 17 September 2016 14:05:59 UTC+1, IanD  wrote:
> On Saturday, September 17, 2016 at 10:40:05 PM UTC+10, Kerry Main wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > 
> > HPE is clearly getting back to its roots as a server and
> > supporting infrastructure company. Some analysts have stated they
> > want to be seen as a neutral company that can play and integrate
> > with all of the other vendors platforms.
> > 
> 
> wtf!!!
> 
> This is exactly what EDS was and HP killed that remaining neutral philosophy that was hammered into every EDS employee
> 
> "We have no product to sell, only the services of our people" was the underlining EDS moto and as an employee when you put together quotes for a customers IT solution, you had the freedom to choose what-ever hardware and software you thought fitted the bill. Sun, HP, IBM etc, it didn't matter back then
> 
> After the HP takeover, we were badgered into picking HP products in the first instance. In time, our customers slowly realized the wonderful impartiality that used to set us apart had gone and they started shopping elsewhere
> 
> Now your telling me that HPE has changed it's spots? I'll believe it when I see it. There a lot of middle management in HP stamped with the 'I must sell HP at all costs' mentality - I will find it an amazing turn-around if HPE can purge years of built up cultural philosophy overnight
> 
> Technical changes are the easiest to implement, cultural ones take years...
> 
> > Over time, I expect HPE to transition to support of OpenVMS in a
> > manner similar to the way they support Linux (now moving towards
> > SuSE which is interesting) and Windows i.e. as a means to sell
> > server and supporting infrastructure.  Hence, other than the
> > occasional brochures like those in this thread, I would not
> > expect HPE to market OpenVMS any more than they market other
> > platforms. As an example, in their future ProLiant brochures and
> > tech documents, they would have "the ProLiant XYZ supports
> > Microsoft Windows Server 2012, Red Hat Linux, SuSE Linux and VSI
> > OpenVMS V9." 
> > 
> > That in itself will be a major milestone.
> > 
> > Having their own server OS solutions would not be in alignment
> > with being a neutral server and supporting infrastructure
> > company. Especially when OpenVMS sales on X86-64 begin to pick
> > up.
> > 
> > It's also why I expect NonStop will be spun off in the next 24
> > months - most likely in a manner similar to how OpenVMS was
> > successfully spun-off. HP-UX will likely not be spun off for a
> > long time (after 2025 perhaps?) as there is an interesting
> > fascination internally at HP with HP-UX.  Also, given HPE is
> > pushing its HP-UX Customers to Linux, I am not sure if any third
> > party Company would take on the future support of HP-UX (unless
> > HPE gave them a truck full of $'s).
> > 
> > Interesting times ..
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Kerry Main
> > Kerry dot main at starkgaming dot com
> 
> It will be interesting to see who snaps up non-stop. The banking sector is slowly moving on from mainframes (commonwealth bank in Australia has gone to great lengths and I believe the other banks here are also moving too)
> 
> IBM perhaps?
> 
> What will HPE actually stand for in the future then?
> 
> IT is becoming more and more a commodity every day. It will eventually become like electricity, you flick the switch and don't care who's supplying you the goods as long as it meets a set minimum standard that you require

Grid electricity may be a commodity. The UK is perilously
close to finding out by bitter experience what happens to
continuity of supply (countrywide and locally) when
"investment" becomes a dirty word, and planning is
abandoned in favour of leaving it to a cartel of suppliers
and a string of half witted 'industry regulators'. If
memory serves me right, parts of the USA had this 
experience some years ago, to an extent.

There are some people and organisations for whom
electricity is sufficiently important that rather than
relying on commodity electricity suppliers and designs,
they take specific measures to minimise the impact of a
failure in the electricity supply chain. Some sites
might have dual feeds via two allegedly separate
routes from the distribution network. Some sites might
have the capability to generate their own electricity
if their grid connection fails. Maybe other options too,
e.g. move the work to another site instead.

Not many sites will go to those extents, but some will
see it as being important enough to spend time and money
on. Enough will do it for there to (continue to) be a
business in designing and building high availability
electricity supplies.

Needs vary. Systems need to be engineered accordingly.

See any parallels with the IT world?