[Info-vax] The real problem that needs solving to grow VMS

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 12/14/2022 8:59 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <tk9jug$12ar$1 at gioia.aioe.org>,
> Arne Vajhøj  <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 11/2/2022 9:30 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>                             could you also answer why people would be
>>> willing to put the future of their company at risk by buying a product
>>> from a small vendor (VSI) that will stop working if that vendor goes bust ?
>>
>> If VSI goes bust - which there is no indication that it will - and
>> if there is noone picking up VMS - which seems unlikely if there
>> are companies willing to pay - and it falls unlucky at the
>> end of a license period and if the server is critical and if
>> they did not negotiate and got a forever license from VSI, then
>> it would be a problem.
>>
>> But that is a lot of if's.
> 
> That _is_ a lot of if's, but still "what if?"s that need to be
> addressed, and none of them are relevant to Linux.  A small
> likelihood of catastrophic failure is still non-zero; why chance
> it when one need not?

We live in a world with lots of risks. It is impossible
to avoid all risks.

People need to evaluate risks and decide whether the
risk is high enough to require action and what type
of action is warranted.

Different people may be in different situations and
have different risk aversion, so they may make different
decisions.

For the particular issue, then I consider the risk too
big to ignore and too small to warrant an immediate
migration off VMS (or an immediate stop of plans for
migrating to VMS). Instead it seems appropriate to
complain to VSI and request some alternative models.

Other people may come to a different conclusion.

Given that there must be lots of risks that
apply to VMS but not to Linux and lots of risks
that apply to Linux but not to VMS, then the fact that
this risk apply to VMS but not to Linux does
not make Linux more attractive.

Arne