[Info-vax] VSI and Process Software announcement

[Dirk Munk]

Stephen Hoffman wrote:
> On 2016-09-25 11:43:29 +0000, Dirk Munk said:
>
>> Kerry Main wrote:
>>> You seem to want to make it so easy that an end user could install an
>>> OS into a prod environment.
>
> Everybody has to go through this, just because we had to walk to school
> all winter long, in the snow, up hill, both ways?
>
>>> Imho, that is just crazy. Regardless of the method, I want
>>> experienced SysAdmins to have their hands on new OS deployments. Yes,
>>> I know there is work to be done to make it easier than it is today,
>>> but the bottom line is there are just way to many variables and
>>> landmines that could impact other OS's to let a rookie deploy a new
>>> OS to a prod environment.
>>
>> You're absolutely right. I've worked in an environment where
>> everything was set up with easy to deploy templates. etc. The result
>> was that no one understood what they were doing, they didn't
>> understand all these settings because they didn't have to think about
>> them. If there were problems, they didn't know where to look, or how
>> to fix the problems.
>
> I remember the uproar over the shift to depot repairs and board
> swapping, too.   When the repair techs stopped using solder and a 'scope.
>
> Welcome to modern computing technology.   We each — we all — depend on
> the knowledge of other folks.   Of the code and the tools of others.
> None of us are experts in everything.   We are increasingly integrating
> our servers and software with more packages and tools and platforms.
> Trying to make our configurations and deployments easier, more
> manageable, more repeatable, and requiring less human interaction is the
> goal that most of us have.

Really. This has nothing to do modern computing. These are the wet 
dreams of managers and sales people. They want to hire cheap staff with 
no knowledge. They rely on service level agreements with other companies 
to deliver the knowledge they need. That's another aspect of modern 
management, if you have the feeling you don't quite have grip on what's 
happening, throw it over the wall to someone else. However those other 
companies are also led my modern managers, that means spend as little 
time as possible for your client, and charge as much as possible.

The result of this kind of thinking are poorly performing computer 
systems overspending in hardware (too slow? Buy a bigger computer), and 
many waisted hours by the people who rely on the computers.

There was a survey about what people hated most on ICT. The result? The 
poor performance, the long waiting times. Is it because the computers 
are too small? No, lousy applications, poor database design, poor 
installations and poor if any tuning.

I have increased the performance of computer systems 10-fold by just a 
bit of tuning. And these computers had a 'standard' setup, as you would 
like to see.

So I'm sorry, but your ideas stink, I have seen the results, and it sucks.

>
> I'm glad that OpenVMS moved forward.   Part of moving forward is keeping
> the best of the old ideas, and rethinking or replacing the areas that
> are no longer advantageous.    That includes reworking or rethinking or
> replacing the console serial line, and manually-configured, local
> deployments booted from DVD, among other approaches that seem
> increasingly antebellum.
>
>
>