[Info-vax] Rdb/x86

[Jan-Erik Söderholm]

Den 2020-11-24 kl. 15:00, skrev Arne Vajhøj:
> On 11/24/2020 8:17 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2020-11-23, IanD <iloveopenvms at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I was making the point that if all these things were known then vsi
>>> could have been promoting this sort of stuff, even if unofficially
>>>
>>> For example, look at how many people here, who are vms advocates
>>> and keep fairly well in the know about what's happening on vms,
>>> didn't really know the state of play with rdb on x86...
>>>
>>> It's all fine to say 'of course' but assumptions don't make for
>>> sales or keep vms customers who are on fringe systems eyeing the
>>> door and potentially leaving
>>>
>>> Risk drives everything and if the marketing arm of vsi is not
>>> getting the word out on every success and even potential success,
>>> then businesses will keep shedding vms to mitigate the risk that
>>> they are running on a dead platform
>>>
>>> I've worked in at least 2 places now where vms has been marched out
>>> the door. One place might have even kept vms but it was too late,
>>> by the time I heard of their plans and created a simple web
>>> interface to their existing rdb platform to show what could be
>>> done, their decision to retire vms had already been concluded at
>>> the board level and funding approved for the replacement system
>>>
>>> By the time the technical people hear of platform decisions, other
>>> marketing departments have already got in and sold the business
>>> their solutions
>>>
>>> Lead times of 12++ months is typical in large companies for
>>> platform decisions, so throwing information into the public arena
>>> late is potentially letting your competitors have a head start and
>>> they are already out there pushing their glossy brochures and
>>> vaporware to lock in future sales
>>>
>>> I happen to think vsi could have said a lot more about rdb on x86
>>> because from my perspective they actually didn't say anything at
>>> all
>>
>> I have included Ian's comment in full as it deserves a second read
>> as Ian very clearly "gets it".
>>
>> The above is a good example of exactly why VSI should be promoting, in 
>> public, the fact that Rdb is now known to be actively being
>> ported to x86-64 VMS.
>>
>> I've just checked the VSI website again and there's _still_ nothing I
>> can see in the news section about Rdb on x86-64 VMS.
>>
>> Absolutely bloody pathetic. :-(
> 
> But what exactly do you want VSI to say?
> 
> "VSI promise that Rdb will be available on VMS x86-64"
> 
> then VSI would have a serious problem if Oracle changed their mind
> and Oracle may get pretty pissed at VSI.
> 
> "Oracle promise that Rdb will be available on VMS x86-64"
> 
> Unless Oracle senior management has officially committed then
> same issues as above.
> 
> "We hear that some smart guys over at Oracle is working on Rdb
>   VMS x86-64"
> 
> And leave it to readers to make their own conclusions.
> 
> That could easily sound rather un-enthusiastic.
> 
> "We just has a meeting with Oracle and the future
> looks bright - see link here ..."
> 
> Maybe that would work.
> 
> But finding a message that is both without legal/business risk
> and enthusiastic is not trivial (unless Oracke has officially
> announced).
> 
> Arne
> 
> 

Those that very much depending on Rdb has probably already
checked this with Oracle. Those a bit smaller might plan to
stay on Alpha or IA64.

Most probaby just thought that it would had been highly surprising
of Oracle was *not* looking at, and/or working on, Rdb/x86. It would
had been surprising of VSI hadn't talked to Oracle *before* the
x86 port even begun...

And, if someone would say anything about this, it would be Oracle,
and they have done so in their regular presentations this fall.
And I'd call that "offical", there was no NDA involved or such.

If anything is pathetic here, it is Simons continued bashing on VSI.