[Info-vax] VAX VMS going forward

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 7/22/2020 3:56 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 7/22/2020 2:45 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 7/22/2020 11:52 AM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>> Wonder why it is that those who stand to benefit the most from
>>> continual scrapping what works and replacing it with new always
>>> suggest said scrapping?
>>>
>>> Most might feel that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
>>>
>>> Then there are IT people who say "we need the work, throw out and
>>> replace".
>>>
>>> :-)
>>
>> There are a few good reasons to upgrade systems and a few bad reasons.
>>
>> If we start with bad reasons then this is management covering their
>> ass by choosing the same as everybody else, management showing
>> "drive" by changing something just to change it etc..
> 
> Or the IT guy that wants to get WEENDOZE or Linux on his resume?  This 
> happens, I've seen it.

Sure developers like to get the latest and greatest cool stuff on their
resume.

But typically they will not be making the platform decision.

>> Good reasons:
>>
>> Even though something works just as well today as it did
>> 25 years ago, then there may be a better solution today.
>> Non-IT example: horses still works fine, but most people
>> agree that cars are significantly better.
> 
> For trial riding ?
> 
> "Better" is quite subjective.

Not really.

Go into any big city and check whether it is cars or horses
that are filling the roads.

>> Even though something works right now, then there is no
>> guarantee that it will continue to work. Running obsolete stuff
>> is a risk.
> 
> Replacing what ain't broke also is a risk.  Just ask all the companies 
> who are no more due to an attempt to "upgrade" to SAP.

True. But it is a risk that one can manage.

>> If the HW breaks can it be replaced.
> 
> In this particular case, emulators ...

That is one way to manage obsolete HW.

>> If something
>> changing breaks the SW can it be fixed.
> 
> That's a wide open topic.  Anything can break.  Anything can need 
> ongoing maintenance.

Yes.

>                       You changed the oil in your auto lately?  If not, 
> have then replaced the auto?

If I could not get oil for a car then I would look for a new car.

>> If the people running
>> the stuff quits can they be replaced.
> 
> Sure, with people who know less, and may leave even quicker.
> 
> What about the risk of long term employees who know the existing system 
> and don't know the new stuff.  Key on "long term", ie; loyal.

If they are good then they can learn the new stuff.

>> Non-IT example:
>> it is July and you are checking your roof and you can see that
>> the beams are seriously weakened - it will collapse if it
>> gets 2 feet or more of snow.
> 
> Now it's broke, or ready to break.  Of course it's time to repair or 
> replace.  That is a different case than "it's just old".
> 
> Also, if the case is "checking your roof/app", and you see it will not 
> remain a solution, then changes are possible.  But why before this?

Just because something is old does not make it a risk.

If it is out of support then it is a risk.

Arne