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

[Dan Cross]

In article <tnei5b$31mru$1 at dont-email.me>,
Dave Froble  <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>> The GPL has been tested in court multiple times, and this has
>> never even been close to an outcome.  Moreover, how many
>> large organizations have bet their collective farms on it?
>> If Google, Amazon, Meta, any number of government labs,
>> not to mention Fortune 500 companies are running Linux in
>> mission-critical roles, do you really think that is likely to
>> happen?  Didn't their lawyers scrutinize it with respect to
>> existing caselaw?
>
>Nothing is guaranteed.  How many actually though Roe vs Wade would be reversed? 
>The unexpected can happen.

Yup.  All atoms in a rock could spontaneously go in the same
direction, propelling it with great force.  I suspect that is
about as likely as the GPL being nullified by SCOTUS.  People
had been gunning for Roe for decades in contrast.

>> [snip]
>> Sorry, but I'd wager a year's salary that this is how most
>> purchasing agents would see the matter.  It is NOT making the
>> case for VMS.  Folks who want to see VMS succeed need to do
>> better to make the case for it.
>
>If a purchasing agent is making IT decisions, then perhaps the customer is 
>already screwed.

Someone in IT is going to be asking these questions, and if they
are not, then they are not doing their job.  It's really that
simple.

>If VMS proviodes the best solution/environment for a particular task, and it is 
>not chosen, isn't that also taking a risk?

Again, you guys don't seem to get it.  This question is
predicated on the assumption that there is a "particular task"
for which VMS provides the best solution/environment.  Yet, no
one seems to be able to articulate what that would be, or, more
importantly, why.

Folks need to reach deep and ask themselves how they can make
the case for VMS, not be butt-hurt that people are asking, "what
is the case for VMS?"  If someone on USENET can trivially shoot
down the arguments, that does not bode well.

You want VMS to be successful?  Then explain why, outside of
legacy environments, it is the best platform for _any_ task, and
in particular why it is better than Linux.  Spare me the
platitudes and abstruse relativelism; "they both have different
risks..." is nonsense: I don't believe anyone is actually
advancing that argument in good faith.  It is obvious that VMS
is riskier than Linux in this day and age, by orders of
magnitude.  And if people want VMS to survive outside of a
dwindling set of legacy applications, they need to articulate
why.

	- Dan C.