[Info-vax] Final Orace release on VMS.

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 11/15/20 8:46 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 11/15/2020 8:35 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> On 11/15/20 8:15 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 11/15/2020 7:53 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>> On 11/15/20 12:37 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>>> Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig at asclothestro.multivax.de> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> In article <i1cslrF4e2jU1 at mid.individual.net>, Bill Gunshannon
>>>>>> <bill.gunshannon at gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Laugh if you will, but, actually, there is a business case for 
>>>>>>> desktop
>>>>>>> to data-center.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Back when DEC used that slogan, it were a very successful company.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is true, but they were also selling totally different and 
>>>>> incompatible
>>>>> systems for the desktop and the data center.  In fact, they had 
>>>>> several totally
>>>>> incompatble desktop systems competing against one another, which I 
>>>>> suspect
>>>>> is why it stopped being so successful.
>>>>>
>>>>> They were not promoting one system from desktop to data center, 
>>>>> just one
>>>>> vendor.
>>>>
>>>> Huh?  Big VAX in the datacenter running VMS. VS3100 on the desktop
>>>> running VMS?  It's what I had working at the University.  As well
>>>> as X-terminals connecting to the big VAX for the students.  The same
>>>> could be done with Alpha, probably Itanium (I  have never used one
>>>> so I won't say for sure) and x86-64 when it gets here.  But, we all
>>>> know it won't.  Just saying it was done and it could be done again.
>>>
>>> He may have been referring to the fact that DEC sold:
>>> * VAX stations
>>> * X terminals
>>
>> Selling the items below doesn't remove the functionality of
>> the items above.
> 
> True.
> 
> But it shows that DEC was not just pushing the same OS from
> data center to desktop - they were pushing all sorts of stuff
> on desktop.

Not sure I would say "pushing" as much as not having
decided on a proper portfolio.

> 
>>> * DECMate II/III

While there was an OS for this one it was primarily just  another
proprietary Word Processor.  There were a  number of them at the time.

>>> * PRO

A PDP-11.  An architecture they had already declared dead and there
was little serious marketing for it.  Not sure how many they made
but I doubt there were even as many as there were Rainbows.

>>> * Rainbow

A CP/M box.  CP/M was already on the decline.  There was never a DEC
OS for these boxes.

>>> * DECPC (rebranded Olivetti PC)
>>> * Digital PC

Just another PC.  Everyone was jumping on this bandwagon.  It ruined
a lot of companies.

>>
>> What killed it was DEC deciding to not keep the GUI components
>> of VMS as up to date as they were trying to do with VMS.
> 
> I suspect that both the price tag and the lack of common
> software also played a role.

Considering what people were willing to pay for a large VAX (and I
know because in those days I worked a large corporation who sold to
both the government and businesses and both partnered with and
competed against DEC) the additional cost of either VS3100's or
the VXT-2000 weren't that big of an add-on.

As for common software, the business was loaded with incompatible
business packages.  Word was coming out, WordPerfect, WordMARC, OAS,
WordStar, Scripsit and probably a dozen others.  All this in addition
to the proprietary Word Processing hardware/software offerings.  It
was a very different world in the 80's.


> 
>> Just out of curiosity, I wonder at what version of VMS the last
>> serious update to X-11 and DECWindows actually occurred.
> 
> Will obviously depend on what is considered serious.
> 
> But CDE in VMS 7.1 in 1996 comes to my mind.
> 
> I doubt anything has happened in this millennium
> (I do not count the I64 port).

No, I wouldn't count porting to new machines, just keeping  up
with the competition.  Something they didn't do well.  And then
there was hitching their wagon to MOTIF.  That worked out about
as well as OSF.

I still think VMS could work on the desktop.  BUt I do not expect
to see it.

bill