[Info-vax] Vax Station 4000 VLC

[Jan-Erik Söderholm]

Den 2018-12-26 kl. 16:34, skrev Bill Gunshannon:
> On 12/26/18 9:05 AM, Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
>> Den 2018-12-26 kl. 14:47, skrev Bill Gunshannon:
>>> On 12/26/18 7:01 AM, Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
>>>> Den 2018-12-26 kl. 10:06, skrev Phillip Helbig (undress to reply):
>>>>> In article <pvudfi$ouc$1 at dont-email.me>,
>>>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Jan-Erik_S=c3=b6derholm?= <jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com>
>>>>> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you have your VMS system accessed in a terminal window or a tab
>>>>>> in your browser, you do not have to "go to a different machine" to
>>>>>> access anything else from the web. Or write a Word document. Or
>>>>>> check your mails on the corporate MS Exchange systems.
>>>>>
>>>>> It starts when you download something in a web browser.  If I want that
>>>>> file on VMS, if I have no browser on VMS, I have to transfer it from
>>>>> another machine.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Extremely easy to do. Usually just a single (S)FTP copy. It's not
>>>> like you have to carry around a disk-pack or something...
>>>>
>>>> Constantly asking for special treatment (browsers, keyboards and such)
>>>> just to use a VMS system, is not doing VMS any good. 
>>>
>>> Not providing the same level of service provided by all of VMS's
>>> competitors is not doing VMS any good, either.
>>>
>>
>> Who expects the "same level of services" from a server OS and a
>> client/desktop OS? Who expects "the same level of services" (what
>> ever that is) from Windows and zOS?
> 
> Windows is the "level of service" VMS has to compete with.  Whether
> you like it or not, it is a fact.
> 
>>
>> Who are VMS's competitors? Now desktop versions of Windows and Linux.
> 

Sorry! Should have been "*Not* desktop versions of Windows and Linux."

> Primarily.

Again, sorry for my mistake. No, VMS will never compete with desktop 
Windows and Linux. And it has never really done that.


> Certainly not zOS as the days when the VAX was going to
> be a mainframe killer just never arrived.
> 
>>
>>
>>>>                                                       VMS has to play
>>>> along using the same interfaces and equipment (such as keyboard layouts
>>>> according to standard client equipment) that is used anywhere else.
>>>> Otherwise VMS will just be seen as something that it’s better to get
>>>> rid of. 
>>>
>>> You are assuming that VMS "is seen" in the first place.
>>
>> It is where it it is currently used. Why upset them?
> 
> Why would increased functionality upset them?  But, if you
> think VMS can survive on the existing (and dwindling) user
> base it now has, well......
> 
> bill