[Info-vax] Life after Digital

[Allen, Daniel P.]

-----Original Message-----
From: info-vax-bounces at rbnsn.com [mailto:info-vax-bounces at rbnsn.com] On Behalf Of Michael Kraemer
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 6:33 AM
To: info-vax at rbnsn.com
Subject: Re: [Info-vax] Life after Digital

Bill Gunshannon schrieb:
> In article <hc5e71$5hd$00$1 at news.t-online.com>,
>       Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer at gsi.de> writes:
>
>>JF Mezei schrieb:
>>
>>
>>>HP chose to NOT fix the problems of VMS (lack of marketing)
>>
>>the problem of VMS is lack of market rather than lack of marketing.
>>
>
>
> Like many others here, I don't believe  that is true.  I think if VMS
> had been properly marketed and supported it could have maintained reasonable
> marketshare.

>One might look back and think for a while why it has *lost* almost all
>of its market share.
>In its heydays mid to end 1980s "all the world was a VAX".
>It was chosen particularly in academia and technical computing
>not because of esoteric features like "clustering and security"
>but rather because the combo VAX+VMS was a convenient platform
>for their computing needs. The other choices were crap PCs
>(640kB!), expensive mainframes and immature Unixen.
>By 1990 this had changed dramatically, and the tasks formerly
>performed by VMS/VAXen could as well be achieved with those
>other, generally cheaper and more convenient platforms.
>Little has changed on the VMS side of things since then, except
>playing catch up (and generally lagging behind) and
>two hardware migrations, which most probably have resulted
>in further losses of customers.

I can tell you with certainty that three factors ended the use of VMS in my little government niche:

1) Cost - pure and simple the software licenses and hardware were very expensive compared to "free" UNIX on commodity hardware. I believe that qualifies as marketing.
2) Proprietary - it was viewed as a "non-standard proprietary" solution that tied you to a specific vendor's hardware. That too was in large part marketing.
3) DEC's reluctance to embrace IP - the emerging network protocol standard. Despite EXTREMELY STRONG support from our network standards division OSI floundered and failed in the open market. Whether or not OSI is/was the superior solution it was an abysmal failure to understand and adapt to the mainstream market. Decnet Phase V didn't sell.

The result was a mass migration to Unix workgroup servers and individual workstations supplied by Sun, IBM, SGI, etc. Today the pendulum has swung again and we are back to centrally operated Windows servers and centrally managed Windows desktops. Sun and AIX are long dead here, Linux and Mac cling to a niche existence in division labs and on researchers/developers unmanaged desktops. The corporate objective is centralized network management right down to the desktop. MS/Windows is marketing that solution and we are buying it by the boatload. We just completed early last month a total corporate migration off the Linux/AIX based mail service and onto Microsoft Exchange. I expect that trend to continue with ever increasing pressure - resistance is futile - you will be assimilated. Me - I'm retiring - not because I dislike Windows particularly but rather I can't stand to overbearing and often excessive and ill-conceived management from on high. Twelve character passwords required on my T&A next cycle - my time card is so much more secure - no bad guy is going to hack that password. Just got to figure where I'm putting the stick-up so I don't forget it....

Dan

_______________________________________________
Info-vax mailing list
Info-vax at rbnsn.com
http://rbnsn.com/mailman/listinfo/info-vax_rbnsn.com