[Info-vax] OpenVMS Hobbyist Notification

[Dave Froble]

On 3/8/2020 8:56 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 3/8/2020 7:38 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 3/8/2020 7:46 AM, Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
>>> Den 2020-03-08 kl. 08:00, skrev Dave Froble:
>>>> Else, who's been asking for VMware?
>>>> Using a VM is not all good.  Some will not want another layer involved.
>>>
>>> For the VMS system manager, it is not another layer. It is just that
>>> what VMS sees as the "host" is not a physical box, it is a VM. Doesn't
>>> make any major difference. When you are within VMS, running your
>>> applications, there is no visible difference.
>>>
>>> When you need an additional VMS "server", instead of waiting 1-2 weeks
>>> for a server to be delivered, you wait an hour for your VMware support
>>> group to create a new VM.
>>>
>>> And, as a developer, if you need a extra test system, you create a new
>>> VirtualBox VM on your laptop.
>>
>> And if you're real time running a line in a steel mill, or the very
>> many other uses one might encounter?
>
> I am pretty sure they could use VM's if it is something like
> VMWare ESXi.
>
> If they don't overallocate CPU's then it should behave similar to bare
> metal. It really is bare metal - in these configs the VM is not running
> on top of the VM software but side by side with the VM software.
>
>> There are many places where a VM instance is acceptable.  Just as
>> there will be places where it is not.
>
> Given the widely usage of virtualization in the rest of x86-64 land
> then it seems likely that the vast majority of VMS x86-64 users
> will be able to run virtualized.
>
>> I know that for my Codis customers, running a VM is not what they do
>> now.  For them, it's another added complexity they might not desire.
>> Or perhaps some will wish to use VMs.
>
> VMS users today can't run virtualized (excluding emulators which is a
> different beast).
>
> But when they get the possibility, then why not.
>
> Sure it may take some time to get used to the idea, but it seems
> most likely that VMS users will be as interested in saving money
> and complying with corporate IT standards as any other OS.
>
>>                                  But to declare that using VMs is sort
>> of automatic is premature and just a prejudiced wild ass guess.
>
> Anything related to the future has some uncertainty.
>
> But it is way more than a wild guess.
>
> Because other platforms has had the capability for many years. And
> other platforms has adopted the technology.

Wasn't one of the drivers for VMs the one app one system in non-VMS 
land?  That is not so significant for VMS users.

> Most with more than 1 server are using virtualization.

Ok, maybe I'm an aberration.  Not one of our customers is using more 
than one system to run the company operations.  PCs on the desktop for 
office automation and user interface, yes.  But actually running the 
company's business, no.

> Some statistics:
>
> https://www.smartprofile.io/analytics-papers/vmware-far-largest-server-virtualisation-market/
>
>
> (75% of companies over 50 employees use virtualization)
>
> https://www.vmware.com/company/why-choose-vmware.html
>
> (100% of Forune 500 companies use virtualization)
>
> Why shoudld VMS be different from all other OS??

Well, for one thing, it is.

Don't misunderstand, since looking at VMs, I really like some of the 
things that they can do.  And yes, in some organizations with people 
dedicated to such, developing the expertise to manage the VMs can be 
helpful.  But if an organization doesn't have that manpower, then having 
to have it is an additional cost, and organizations don't like 
additional cost.

There are non-fortune 500 entities out there ....

-- 
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