[Info-vax] VMS Software Q1 '23 Update

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 1/24/2023 2:33 PM, John Dallman wrote:
> In article <tqp7bm$871q$1 at dont-email.me>,
> clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley) wrote:
>> There are no longer any current plans for bare metal support:
> 
> That is not surprising. I'm having to provide comprehensive
> justifications for running /any/ server OS on bare metal. This applies
> even where it's much more efficient (because of natural code segment
> sharing when running many copies of a large application for testing).
> 
> The current fashion among corporate sysadmins is "VMWare for everything."
> It gives them more of a feeling of power, because they expect they can
> bluff their way out of hard work requested by users or manager who don't
> understand virtualisation.

I think the general landscape is a bit broader:
* VM's on VMWare (or in some cases Hyper-V) in own data center
* k8s containers managed by OpenShift or Tanzu in own data center
* VM's in public cloud
* k8s containers in public cloud

But the traditional model with no VM/container at all is
certainly getting very rare.

VM's/containers are way more flexible. And when servers
comes with like 32c64t per socket then just running a single
server on the hardware makes little sense.

VMS will not support k8s containers the next 10 years - probably
never, so VM's is the obvious choice.

And it avoids the problem of the crazy huge diversity in
x86-64 hardware.

The two biggest groups of VMS users in the coming years will be:
- those that like VM's because it fits nicely into the
   corporate infrastructure strategy
- those that can live with VM's because it really doesn't
   matter

If there are some users that cannot live with VM's, then they
should tell VSI. Then VSI will hopefully put one or two
physical machines on the supported list.

But no reason to expect VSI to spend money on this until
actually customers ask for it.

Arne