[Info-vax] Licenses on VAX/VMS 4.0/4.1 source code listing scans

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 12/12/2021 9:22 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 12/11/21 7:38 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 12/11/2021 7:12 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> On 12/11/21 2:25 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> On 12/11/2021 1:40 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>>> On 12/11/21 11:51 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>>> And all the largest systems are distributed. They use
>>>>>> Hadoop, Cassandra, Kafka etc.. Traditional technologies
>>>>>> does simply not scale to that level.
>>>>>
>>>>> You wanna bet?  While some of the frontend stuff has mofrated to
>>>>> the typical web crap the IRS for example is still a Unisys OS2200
>>>>> shop with the code being mostly Legacy ACOB carried forward from
>>>>> its origination on a UNIVAC 1100.
>>>>
>>>> Yes. And that system may have been a big system 30 years ago.
>>>
>>> The US IRS is one of the biggest ISes in the world.  Large enough
>>> that some of the biggest contracting companies in the United States
>>> looked at an RFP to replace it and said it probably couldn't be
>>> done.  And so it is still written mostly in COBOL running on Unisys
>>> OS2200.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But today large systems are NNN/NNNN nodes, NNNN CPU's, N/NN TB 
>>>> memory and N PB disk.
>>>
>>> In what way does that contradict what I said above?  Or are you one
>>> of those people who think IBM Mainframe still means 360/40.
>>
>> A z15 max out at 24 CPU with 190 cores for application and OS
>> and 40 TB memory 192 IO cards.
>>
>> The largest Unisys (the 8300) is as far as I can read only
>> 8 CPU with 64 cores for application and OS and 512 GB of memory.
>>
>> It just doesn't scale to what companies with large data processing
>> requirements need today.
>>
>> 11 years ago(!) the largest Hadoop cluster had 2000 CPU with 22400
>> cores, 64 TB memory and 21 PB data on disk.
> 
> And yet the IRS is doing it just fine.  Go figure.

Sure. They got a mid-size problem and their system capable
of handling mid-size problems does fine.

Those that have a very large problem would not be fine.

Of course IRS could get the same mid-size capability for way
less money on a different platform, but porting is probably
expensive. And they do not have any competitors to worry about! :-)

> And then we have DFAS which is an IBM shop handles payroll for all
> the military and civilians in DOD.  A bit more than any company I
> can think  of.
> 
> And then we also have the DOD EMR system.  Every member of the
> military, all their dependents, all the retirees that are still
> getting care at an MTF (like me!)  That's and IBM mainframe, too.
> and the application is written in COBOL.

Yes.

I suspect they fit pretty nicely with my original description:
- is processing money
- first version was written before 1995
- has not been rewritten after 1995

> Seems that COBOL and mainframes are doing just fine.

IBM's mainframe revenue is decreasing over time (it spikes
every year they release a new model and plummets when there
is no new model, but the trend is downwards). Still significant
money though.

Decreasing revenue is not doing fine.

> Just so you will know where I am coming from on this, there is
> a strong move to push "modernization" of mainframes.  The current
> definition of "modernization" is move to a different platform and
> re-write all your applications in the language du jour.

My impression is that it is like:

90% : too expensive and risky to port so stay
4%  : port to Cobol on Linux/Windows
4%  : port to Java on  Linux/Windows
2%  : port to C# on  Windows

(Java is from 1995 and C# is from 2002 so not anything new)

Arne