[Info-vax] relaunch or legacy

[Dave Froble]

On 2/1/2022 1:51 PM, Gérard Calliet wrote:
> Le 01/02/2022 à 18:23, Stephen Hoffman a écrit :
>> On 2022-01-28 11:00:25 +0000, Gérard Calliet said:
>>
>>> Le 27/01/2022 à 22:20, John Dallman a écrit :
>>>> If you could express yourselves much more concisely, you might get better
>>>> results.
>>> You are absolutely right. This has always been my problem.
>>
>> Prolix is, and it detracts.
> I must say, it is difficult of understand because it is not enought prolix. You
> have facts, interpretations, reasons, motives.
>
> Difficult to expose all. But necessary if you expect the ones you are
> criticizing have their reasons, and you try to understand and not to condamn.
> The french customers I know just condam. I was hoping thinking could do better.

All you can do is lay out your business plan for them.  Either they will buy it, 
or they will not do so.

> It is always a pain trying to think and expose it if the reader takes only the
> facts, and is always totally confindent on his interpretations, reasons, motives.
>
> Perhaps I have cultural difficulties regarding brainstorming, and the pure sense
> of thinktank is simpler than that I expect.
>>
>> The following two points seem the crux:
>>
>>> 3) x86 is necessary, but making it the top priority has been a mistake
>>
>> There are always trade-offs.
> oh yeah?

VSI has a business plan. They acquired what they needed to pursue that plan. 
They are moving forward with their plan.  They alsoo are listening to customers, 
when they can do so.  They did not plan on a new Alpha release.  They listened 
to customers and made a new Alpha release.  They are supporting Alpha users. 
I'm wondering whether Alpha users are supporting VSI?

>> Folks still on HPE versions aren't buying, or aren't buying yet.
>>
>> They aren't buying support, and aren't buying upgrades and that for whatever
>> local reasons, and are interested in per-call and fix-my-app fixes at most.
>>
>> Not buying means no revenues.
>>
>> More than a few sites do need dedicated staff for updates and overhauls and
>> app refactoring for their existing production, but that maintenance and upkeep
>> costs money and time and focus.
>>
>> VSI seemingly has no rights to patch older HPE versions.
> They say. And if it is the case, no idea from VSI to renegociate it.

As mentioned, VSI has what they need for their business plan.  Doing mode would 
dilute what they are trying to accomplish.  Not a good idea.

> What about taking the fees for the transfered HPE support, and not thinking
> about being a little more cooperative?

At this time, I don't think VSI is providing support for HPe versions.  If so, 
it's most likely through HPe.  Not the best business practice.

>> Which for those sites means providing workarounds for app problems on those
>> other and older versions at best, maybe some add-on back-porting
>> performance-permitting, and making suggestions for upgrades.
>>
>> Which is what you (Gérard) and others are already doing.
> We'll do lesser and lesser if everyones thinks VMS is dead. Ok, they are wrong,
> or perhaps not anyone can say if VMS will survive.

VSI is currently surviving.  Whether VMS users are supporting that survival may 
be in question for some users.

> What I try to say is that VSI creates by his way of acting the certitude that
> VMS will dye.
> It is a false belief, an effect of an unundurstandable strategy.
> There is another false belief that says "they have their reasons, poor guys,
> they do just what they can, and we have to accept everything".
> I try to explain why these two beliefs are false, and why they exist. A little
> bit complex.
>
> But we can go on just on the facts. Pry. And lament if we dye.
>>
>> VSI seemingly already lacks a staff large enough for the existing x86-64 port;
>> for what work they already have on their roadmap.
>>
>> Diluting VSI focus (further) to provide development outsourcing and app
>> services for older versions—and whatever else you're suggesting in that wall
>> of text you've posted—risks delaying the x86-64 portI'm not sure they would be
>> a lot of ressources to open the door at
> operations of collaboration with customers or consultants keeping alive the old
> things.
>
> What you say I do could be a little bit helped (for example helping someone who
> had port python, not being his concurrent), with some fees to VSI to deliver
> expertise. The old guys would be gratefull and would think about going ahead. On
> the contrary not any help and just force the pace to the old guys. They condamn.
>>
>> Which will detract from the revenues VSI sees available from those sites
>> wanting or needing to keep current hardware and software.
>>
>>> 4) VSI is creating a desert around it: no marketing, no community
>>> encouragement, discouragement of intermediaries; the ecosystem is heading for
>>> implosion
>>
>> So what are your plans for the production environments and apps and sites
>> you're working with, should that implosion arise?
> Doing for the Alpha and Itanium environments what I do for the VAX environments.
> But VMS will be as died as museum OSes.

There most likely be no more VAX, Alpha, and itanic CPUs.  There is nobody in 
the semiconductor industry interested in making them.  Samsung had a license and 
the design.  They decided to make more money on flat panel TVs.

One will never move forward if one's attention is focused on the past.


-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486