[Info-vax] CRTL and RMS vs SSIO

[Simon Clubley]

On 2021-10-23, Lawrence D?Oliveiro <lawrencedo99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 1:11:10 AM UTC+13, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> For the record however, I am a seriously technical type, not a management 
>> type ...
>
> Prove it. Look seriously into the technicalities of what that company offers.
>

I don't have to prove anything to you Lawrence and those people around
here who I _do_ care about already know what kinds of skills and
knowledge I do possess.

> For example, looking more deeply into their case studies, it?s clear that they don?t expect to move any serious amount of code, even just user-mode code, across unchanged. There?s always some serious rewriting involved. For instance, in one case study, the customer is using DECnet, yet in the description of how that port was done, mention of DECnet mysteriously disappears.
>
> For another example, look how they blandly claim that a whole bunch of VMS system calls can be carried across, including all the SYS$ calls. Really?? Including, say, $CMEXEC or $CMKRNL? Do you really expect those to work without an authentic VMS kernel behind them?
>
> Those are just some examples of the sorts of gaps you might not notice if you are not a technical type.

Congratulations Lawrence, you have just made my point for me.

As I and others have told you from the beginning, getting VMS code
running on another operating system is not easy.

Yet you come riding into town as if you are the Messiah and proclaiming
that porting from VMS to Linux will be easy if we follow your glorious
path.

Here are very skilled professionals who have done this move away from VMS
for multiple customers, yet even so, VMS is still being ported to x86-64.
The reason for that is not all applications can be moved away from VMS
and there is still a requirement for real VMS systems.

You dismiss Sector 7's multi-decade efforts and then claim that you can
somehow do better than them and claim it can be done in a relatively
short period of time ? Yeah, right.

The problem with you Lawrence is that you are so clueless about what
is needed to achieve this, you don't actually realise just how clueless
you are.

That's why I pointed you to their website so you could privately
see just how much effort was involved in doing what you claim can
be done easily, without me having to ram that message home in public
to you.

Unfortunately, you come across as the kind of person who really is
arrogant enough to think they can somehow do better than what everyone
else has done before them, so here I am telling you in public what
I was hoping you would realise privately by yourself.

You want people, including me, to take you seriously ? You need to
deliver on your claims or at least lay out a detailed path that shows
why it's better than what people before you have achieved.

Handwaving is not laying out a detailed path, BTW.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.