[Info-vax] Programming languages on VMS

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

Den 2018-02-12 kl. 23:50, skrev Bill Gunshannon:
> On 02/12/2018 05:34 PM, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>> Den 2018-02-12 kl. 23:18, skrev Stephen Hoffman:
>>> On 2018-02-10 04:18:23 +0000, DaveFroble said:
>>>
>>>> Consider a mfg company, which is what Jan Erik has.  IT is a necessary 
>>>> expense.   Not directly something that produces income.
>>>>
>>>> The purpose of a mfg company is to produce goods, which are sold, thus 
>>>> creating profits.
>>>>
>>>> Now, if, and that is a valid question, the IT system is meeting the 
>>>> company's requirements, why would the company waste money to replace 
>>>> their IT system?  As requirements change, the system(s) can be modified 
>>>> to reflect changing requirements.  But rarely, if ever, will things 
>>>> change so much that the current IT system is so far away from 
>>>> requirements.  It just doesn't happen.
>>>>
>>>> So, replacement of the entire system just isn't going to happen.
>>>
>>> When next the manufacturing line gets rebuilt, the folks will be looking 
>>> for upgrades and replacements.
>>
>> Funny seeing other speculating about an environment they know very
>> little about (apart from that it currently uses VMS)... :-)
> 
> I think you would be surprised how many here actually have experience
> with computerized manufacturing environments.

I understand that of course. Has been there constantly since 1982.

But that is not the same as knowing everything about every site out there.

> 
>>
>> Now, there are something like 15-20 lines, not one line. We have
>> two projects right now for one completely new assembly line and one
>> upgraded line. Both will use the current VMS based support system
>>
>> Any replacement of the support system will run as a separate project.
>>
>>
>>> In short: don't look to existing sites for innovative suggestions...
>>
>> Right...
>>
> 
> Manufacturing automation has come a long ways int he past 20 years.

Of course. Or the past 35 years, for that matter.

> Anyone who fails to consider modern improvements is being very
> foolish.  They may still continue to operate, but just how much
> profit will they be flushing down the toilet.
> 

There *is* a new system in the works. Don't worry...

> bill
>