INFO-VAX Mon, 05 Feb 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 71 Contents: If you are attending the Encompass event in Canada Re: Intel prepares to kill off the Pentium 4 Re: Intel prepares to kill off the Pentium 4 Re: Intel prepares to kill off the Pentium 4 RE: Intel prepares to kill off the Pentium 4 Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 4 Feb 2007 12:26:48 -0800 From: "Sue" Subject: If you are attending the Encompass event in Canada Message-ID: <1170620808.002740.152600@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> Can you please send me email. Can you also let me know if there is anything you would like me to talk about (informally). thanks, Sue ------------------------------ Date: 4 Feb 2007 22:34:43 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Intel prepares to kill off the Pentium 4 Message-ID: <52n5c3F1o87deU1@mid.individual.net> In article , JF Mezei writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote: >> Or they could just kill Itanium to save their own bottom line and not >> give a rat's patootie about HP's bottom line. HP maiking bad decisions >> really isn't Intel's problem. > > > Its the reverse. If Intel pisses off HP, HP will move its real business > (the wintel stuff) over to AMD. Your smokin' that wacky terbaky again. > > Lets say HP buys 3 billion worth of 8086s from Intel. Intel may decide that > it is worth spending a token 1 billlion in maintaining IA64 on life > support in order to preserve the 3 billion revenus from HP. > > We know that IA64 is not profitable for Intel. But how much money it loses > is important. If Intel loses billions a year, then the impetus to kill off > IA64 would be greater than if it loses only tens of thousands a year > (basically breaking even, even though still technically in the red). > > If HP signals to Intel that it is fully unhappy with where IA64 is going > (or rather not going) and threathens to move its whole business over to > AMD, then Intel would be more amenable to help pay for HP to move off that > IA64 thing. I expect that Intel would simply say, "See you on the bread line." HP need Intel, Intel doesn't need HP. There are a lot of major purchasers who will only buy boxes that say "Intel Inside". And HP can't afford to walk away from them. AMD is OK for some businesses and, of course, for home users but Intel is still the leader in the realm of marketing. > > Look at Apple. It used IBM's unwillingness to produce a full range of > Apple-specific PowerpC chips as an excuse to go to Intel. And it has had no effect whatsoever on IBM's bottom-line. Nor has it increased Apple's acceptance inthe market beyond the riny niche it already had. > > HP could simply decide that HP-UX and VMS need to move to a platform that > spans from laptop to data centre in order to compete against Linux and IA64 > doesn't fit the bill. Too late for that. At least for VMS. > > > My prediction is that Tukwilla is to IA64 what EV7 was to Alpha. End of > platform announced before Tukwilla is ready with promise to > > Is the announcement of IA64's retirement going to be made this year or in > 2008 ? Tukwilla is now expected in 2009. (so will probably arrive in 2010). > Meanwhile, the 8086 will have progressed significantly. Its next major > iteration is expected in 2008. And that will do nothing for VMS, except maybe be the last nail in its coffin. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 4 Feb 2007 22:37:41 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Intel prepares to kill off the Pentium 4 Message-ID: <52n5hlF1o87deU2@mid.individual.net> In article , Tad Winters writes: > bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote in > news:52kndeF1m9o2dU1@mid.individual.net: > >> In article <45c47807$0$7466$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, >> "Neil Rieck" writes: >>> >>> "Tad Winters" wrote in >>> message news:Xns98CBE9BC1B3C5staffordnospamwinter@130.81.64.196... >>> [...snip...] >>>> >>>> So, wouldn't you think it would have been better to port to AMD to >>>> start with? AMD's 64 bit processor provides better performance for >>>> the 32-bit crowd at little additional cost over their 32-bit >>>> processor and, from my experience, at less cost than Intel's 32-bit >>>> offering. I would also believe their 64-bit processor sales are >>>> probably ahead of Itanium. >>>> >>> >>> Intel makes both the x86-64 and Itanium processors. Intel will save >>> tons of money by killing Itanium and HP should be able to leverage >>> this guilt by saying "we paid to port OpenVMS to Itanium and now >>> you're killing it; so now you must pay for the OpenVMS port to >>> x86-64". >> >> And Intel's response would be, "Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha". >> >>> >>> This is why it would be a good idea to sell OpenVMS to Intel. >> >> Why would they want it? An OS with no more future than the only >> processor it runs on. >> > [..snip..] >> >> Which has what to do with Intel buying VMS? The car makers need those >> parts to build their cars. The computer manufacturers need the >> components to build their computers. Intel not only doesn't need VMS >> it really has no possible use for it. Face facts! Wake up and smell >> the coffee! Get a grip on reality! HP screwed up. No one is going >> to bail them out. > > Strangely, I believe Intel still uses VMS systems for its production > process control. That could prove a bit of a gotcha. > Sounds like another urban legend, like the VMS constant and all those VMS machines being used by DOD. I seem to remember it was VAXes that ran the FABs and the version of VMS they run is pretty much cast in stone a tthis point. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 4 Feb 2007 22:43:45 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Intel prepares to kill off the Pentium 4 Message-ID: <52n5t1F1o87deU3@mid.individual.net> In article , david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes: > In article <52kndeF1m9o2dU1@mid.individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>In article <45c47807$0$7466$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, >> "Neil Rieck" writes: >>> >>> "Tad Winters" wrote in message >>> news:Xns98CBE9BC1B3C5staffordnospamwinter@130.81.64.196... >>> [...snip...] >>>> >>>> So, wouldn't you think it would have been better to port to AMD to start >>>> with? AMD's 64 bit processor provides better performance for the 32-bit >>>> crowd at little additional cost over their 32-bit processor and, from my >>>> experience, at less cost than Intel's 32-bit offering. I would also >>>> believe their 64-bit processor sales are probably ahead of Itanium. >>>> >>> >>> Intel makes both the x86-64 and Itanium processors. Intel will save tons of >>> money by killing Itanium and HP should be able to leverage this guilt by >>> saying "we paid to port OpenVMS to Itanium and now you're killing it; so now >>> you must pay for the OpenVMS port to x86-64". >> >>And Intel's response would be, "Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha". >> >>> >>> This is why it would be a good idea to sell OpenVMS to Intel. >> >>Why would they want it? An OS with no more future than the only processor >>it runs on. >> > Maybe because it is still the OS running their FABS. > If that is still truei (and, personally, I doubt it), it's a safe bet it isn't running on Itanium. And the last version of VMS for the VAX that runs those FABs was completed long ago. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 19:20:35 -0500 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Intel prepares to kill off the Pentium 4 Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu=20 > [mailto:bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Gunshannon > Sent: February 4, 2007 5:38 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Intel prepares to kill off the Pentium 4 >=20 [snip ...] > > Strangely, I believe Intel still uses VMS systems for its=20 > production=20 > > process control. That could prove a bit of a gotcha. > >=20 >=20 > Sounds like another urban legend, like the VMS constant and all > those VMS machines being used by DOD. I seem to remember it was > VAXes that ran the FABs and the version of VMS they run is pretty > much cast in stone a tthis point. >=20 > bill >=20 Nope - like the DOD stuff, it has been stated here and other places in the past that these are mostly Alpha OpenVMS servers. Regards, Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 13:43:10 -0500 From: Stephen Hoffman Subject: Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX Message-ID: Goetz Hoffart wrote: > Stephen Hoffman wrote: > >> I'd probably look to port Bonjour to OpenVMS. > > Why this? Bonjour isn't an AFPd, it justs propagates services _like_ AFP > in the network. Bonjour is a zero configuration package -- yes, it's a bit surreal to have an add-on third-party package for OpenVMS to provide zeroconf -- see below -- but it's an option. It would provide pointers into other services offered by OpenVMS, such as CIFS or NFS. > I'm looking for old AFP daemons. Yes, I know. I also know there have been others looking for PATHWORKS for Macintosh, and I spent quite a bit of time digging into related topics over the years. If you do manage to find this and it's available, send along a pointer and I'll add it to the FAQ. >> Apple itself lists Appletalk (AFS and otherwise) as something new >> applications should not implement. > > Sources? Never heard of this. From the Apple web site. http://developer.apple.com/networking/legacy.html Apple recommends Bonjour there, and integration with other IP-based technologies. >> (If there's call for it -- and there's not already a product around -- >> HoffmanLabs can be contracted to provide Bonjour.) > > Sorry, can't get your point. HoffmanLabs provides custom software services for OpenVMS. -- www.HoffmanLabs.com Services for OpenVMS ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 20:17:52 +0100 From: usenet@hoffart.de (Goetz Hoffart) Subject: Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX Message-ID: <1ht11l9.1vbbqwi5a3icpN%usenet@hoffart.de> Stephen Hoffman wrote: > >> Apple itself lists Appletalk (AFS and otherwise) as something new > >> applications should not implement. > > > > Sources? Never heard of this. > > From the Apple web site. > > http://developer.apple.com/networking/legacy.html > > Apple recommends Bonjour there, and integration with other IP-based > technologies. Same source: | Many of the advantages of AppleTalk are now available on TCP/IP | courtesy of Bonjour. "Many" - enough said. Bonjour + Mac OS X Finder are not half as good as the classic ascendors. Unfortunately. The better the AFPd of Mac OS (X) got, the worse service propagation and the Finder got. > >> (If there's call for it -- and there's not already a product around -- > >> HoffmanLabs can be contracted to provide Bonjour.) > > > > Sorry, can't get your point. > > HoffmanLabs provides custom software services for OpenVMS. Okay. But they can't help me getting Alisashare, right? :) Grüße Götz -- http://www.knubbelmac.de/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 00:53:05 +0100 From: usenet@hoffart.de (Goetz Hoffart) Subject: Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX Message-ID: <1ht1e9l.1vq7l0j1qzystnN%usenet@hoffart.de> William Pechter wrote: > One way to do it is a *BSD/Linux box runing Netatalk with Samba and/or > NFS used to the TCP speaking world. A way to do _what_? I said that I'm _not_ looking for a modern approach. I can't believe that I get Linux as an answer after I asked a question about a software from 1986 in a VMS newsgroup :-) Linus didn't even start at university at that time! Grüße Götz -- http://www.knubbelmac.de/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 00:53:05 +0100 From: usenet@hoffart.de (Goetz Hoffart) Subject: Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX Message-ID: <1ht1ebq.rfke3e1kyqz1kN%usenet@hoffart.de> JF Mezei wrote: > > I'm not looking for modern productions environments but for ancient > > software. > > VAX or Alpha ? I've got both here, doesn't matter. > I once installed pathwroks/MAC on a vax. It sort of worked. I have a 1992 > and 1996 CDs which may still have it for VAX. Thanks, see your inbox. But Pathworks/Mac isn't the successor of Alisashare, isn't it (not sure!)? Grüße Götz -- http://www.knubbelmac.de/ ------------------------------ Date: 4 Feb 2007 18:50:00 -0800 From: sean@obanion.us Subject: Re: Wanted: Alisashare / Alisatalk for VMS / VAX Message-ID: <1170643800.451117.6140@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com> Acording to this bio of Robert B. Denny who claims to be the founder of Alisa Systems, yes, Pathworks/Mac is the successor to Alisatalk (which matches my recollection of sites migrating from Alisa to Pathworks): http://pinpoint.dc3.com/news.html Which says, in part and near the bottom: "For the next twelve years, I built Alisa Systems into a successful technology integration company. We developed the first AppleTalk protocol stack on a non-Mac platform (VAX/VMS), and followed that with the AlisaTalk series of products that permitted the VAX to act as a file and print server for Macintosh networks. AlisaTalk won numerous industry awards over its life span, including four Digital Review Target Awards in a row. This product line was eventually licensed to Digital and is sold as Pathworks/Mac. From that time onward, Alisa's focus became E-mail integration and directory services, centered around the AlisaMail product, an enterprise multi-protocol email switch and directory server." Sean On Feb 4, 3:53 pm, use...@hoffart.de (Goetz Hoffart) wrote: > JF Mezei wrote: > > > I'm not looking for modern productions environments but for ancient > > > software. > > > VAX or Alpha ? > > I've got both here, doesn't matter. > > > I once installed pathwroks/MAC on a vax. It sort of worked. I have a 19= 92 > > and 1996 CDs which may still have it for VAX. > > Thanks, see your inbox. > > But Pathworks/Mac isn't the successor of Alisashare, isn't it (not > sure!)? > > Gr=FC=DFe > G=F6tz > --http://www.knubbelmac.de/ ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.071 ************************