[Info-vax] The Doom of VAX VMS Hobbyist Licenses?

[Dave Froble]

On 7/21/2020 5:10 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 7/21/20 4:56 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 7/21/2020 2:36 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> On 7/21/20 1:41 PM, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>> rljenkin at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Happy to hear any and all options.
>>>>
>>>> Here's my opinion ... it's amazing how many times people can have the
>>>> same discussion of VAX hobbyist systems :-)
>>>
>>> What's truly amazing is how this technology was abandoned and yet
>>> after all this time there are still people using it.  And enjoying
>>> the experience.
>>>
>>> bill
>>>
>>
>> Abandoned ?????
>>
>> I don't see it that way.
>
> Maybe a poor choice of words.  It's inventor and owner basically just
> dumped it in favor of RISC, like so many others.  But I am one who still
> thinks that the VAX and, yes, the PDP-11 could have continued to develop
> and moved forward.  :-)
>
>>
>> Regardless, when the C-VAX CPU was introduced was the time for DEC to
>> change directions.  I believe that was before the IBM PC introduction,
>> but, I could be wrong.  Yeah, hindsight is usually rather good. >
>> If DEC had introduced low cost computers, using VMS as the OS, and
>> pursued the low cost market, perhaps we would not have Microsoft,
>> Intel, and a few others.
>
> Intel and Microsoft did not gain their position based on technical
> superiority.  Had much mnore to do with dubious business practices.
> But history is being rewritten to cover all that up so people will
> continue to believe things like the PDP-11 and VAX were junk.
>
>>
>> The dinosaurs in charge were still thinking about replacing IBM, using
>> the hugely successful VAX 9000 to turn large piles of money into small
>> piles of money, and wondering why anyone would want a computer in
>> their home.
>>
>> Wasn't abandoned, it was frittered away.
>>
>
> Well, I meant abandoned in the sense of totally in house.  No outsider
> came along to kill VAX.  DEC was more than happy to do it themselves
> when they jumped on the RISC bandwagon.
>
> bill
>

I thought we were discussing VMS, not VAX.

If x86 could be turned into something useful, with enough effort, then 
VAX also could have done the same.  The N-VAX CPU was RSICy inside I 
understand.  Could have continued to make it work.  consider, much of 
what allowed the itanic to succeed in any manner was process shrinks and 
massive on chip memory, not any really good tech.

But in 1990 the VAX was old tech, and new work had pointed to better 
ways to proceed.  Nothing wrong with that.  Alpha was suppose to be good 
for 25 years, and while abandoned toward the end of that period, it 
still did much of what it was implemented to do.

-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486