[Info-vax] OpenSSL CSWS-2.2-1

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 4/7/19 2:54 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 4/7/2019 10:21 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> When the recent discussion about Intersystems was going
>> on I saw it again.  There is a very finite expense in
>> VARs moving to the new version of VMS.  Both on the
>> current architecture and on the future new architecture.
>> One must buy new equipment to develop, test and maintain
>> the product on the new architecture.  One must buy the
>> new version of the OS and the necessary licenses to use
>> it.  And one must weigh that cost against expected revenues.
>> When one was already considering dropping support it can
>> become very hard to justify the needed expense when one
>> has other platforms that more than supply the revenue
>> to keep the company successful.
> 
> They don't need to buy new x86-64 HW - they can run it on VM's.

And those are free?

> 
> And I expect that VSI offer ISV's (I assume you mean ISV's not VAR's)
> licenses for free or very little.

I certainly have n ot heard of anyone getting free licenses.  Anybody
want to confirm that?  Very little is a subjective term.  How much
"very little" actually is may depend on which side of the fence you
are standing.

> 
> So the cost is the effort to port and test. Which obviously
> can be substantial.

And maintain after you have ported and tested.

> 
>> Sadly, I think this forced change may be more detrimental
>> to the continued success of VMS than people either expect
>> or want.
> 
> The move from Itanium to x86-64 will certainly hurt VMS short term.
> 
> But given that Itanium is dead then either VMS move or VMS is dead. It
> was not a real choice.
> 
> And long term being on a standard HW platform may turn out to be a good
> thing.

Yes, it may.  And believe it or not, I would like to see that happen.
But some people really need to look at this from the point of view
of the outside world.  It is not as rosy as many want to see it.

bill