INFO-VAX Thu, 17 Feb 2005 Volume 2005 : Issue 96 Contents: 7.21 7.32 upgrade oddities Re: HP financials: Alpha sales down Re: HP financials: Alpha sales down IA64 webinar transcripts posted linux kernel has major security flaws ... Re: linux kernel has major security flaws ... Re: linux kernel has major security flaws ... Re: Looking for suggestions for bootcamp sessions Re: Looking for suggestions for bootcamp sessions Re: Looking for suggestions for bootcamp sessions Re: mandatory 7.32 update (in 8.2 ship) questions Re: mandatory 7.32 update (in 8.2 ship) questions Re: Mounting disks during STARTUP Need performance help Re: NFS mounts to Solaris Server Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? RE: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Re: PDFs for HP C docs Re: read monitor (>>>) variables from OpenVMS ? Re: rx5670 for $2K Re: rx5670 for $2K Re: rx5670 for $2K Re: set shadow/log bug Re: set shadow/log bug Re: So how big a parachute did she have? Sound on a PWS Re: Sound on a PWS Re: Sound on a PWS Re: Sound on a PWS Re: Sound on a PWS Re: Sound on a PWS Re: Speed of light as speed limit (was Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw !) Re: Speed of light as speed limit (was Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw !) Re: Status of devices Re: Thoughts about VMS ECOs now in .PCSI$COMPRESSED form Re: VMS and Comcast cable modem [OT:] Biometrics Re: [OT] Speed of light as speed limit (was Re: DECW$CLOCK design [OT]: Linux security pitch Re: [OT]: Linux security pitch [OT]: Substitute VMS for Linux in this article Re: [OT]: Substitute VMS for Linux in this article [OT]: Windows XP64 Pro RC2 beta Re: [OT]: Windows XP64 Pro RC2 beta RE: [OT]: Windows XP64 Pro RC2 beta Re: [OT]: Windows XP64 Pro RC2 beta ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 17 Feb 2005 05:15:56 -0800 From: tadamsmar@yahoo.com Subject: 7.21 7.32 upgrade oddities Message-ID: <1108646155.964807.61910@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> I find that the command: set acl/obje=logi "FOOBAR" no longer works even when: set acl/obje=logi FOOBAR works, with logical name table FOOBAR. I wonder it there are any other syntax changes? I notice that "SET ACL" has been obsolete a long time. My bad. Maybe I will change to "SET SECURITY". Is there a simple rule for transforming "SET ACL" statements to "SET SECURITY". ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:22:52 GMT From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger) Subject: Re: HP financials: Alpha sales down Message-ID: In article <1108616334.31cc005d5893876d514ad322c4075084@teranews>, JF Mezei wrote: >> http://news.com.com/HP+delivers+first+earnings+report+post-Fiorina/2100-7341_3-5579498.html?tag=nefd.top > >## >HP also saw its profitability in its server and storage segment drop, >even as sales continued to rise. The company posted an operating profit >of $71 million, down from $153 million in the year-ago quarter, while >revenue rose 9 percent, to $4 billion. The company saw sales gains in >its industry standard and HP-UX server sales, but it saw drops in its >NonStop and AlphaServer product lines. >## > > >So this would seem to go against the rumours of VMS sales increasing. AlphaServer = VMS + Tru64. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 06:45:35 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: HP financials: Alpha sales down Message-ID: <1108639990.ec672680412211b02562c18777061fe0@teranews> Robert Deininger wrote: > >So this would seem to go against the rumours of VMS sales increasing. > > AlphaServer = VMS + Tru64. I would have though that Tru64 sales would have completely stabilised (to a very low level) some time ago. Wouldn't VMS slaes have accounted for the vast majority of Alpha sales in the last year or two since Tru64 was officially without any future since Sept 7th 2001 ? The fact that HP killed the port of TruCluster to HP-UX wouldn't really have affected Tru64 sales, would it ? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:55:19 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: IA64 webinar transcripts posted Message-ID: <3v2dnRc1lOjVP4nfRVn-jg@igs.net> http://www.openvms.org/phorum/read.php?f=6&i=428&t=428 ...scroll to bottom for link -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 05:39:08 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com Subject: linux kernel has major security flaws ... Message-ID: <1108647548.633571.157540@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> how can people even seriously consider running this garbage when vms is out there? http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21295 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:06:34 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: Re: linux kernel has major security flaws ... Message-ID: bob@instantwhip.com wrote: > how can people even seriously consider running this > garbage when vms is out there? > > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21295 Easy answer - HP doesn't tell them that VMS exists and what it can do for them. And if you are a VAR selling less than $1MM worth of 'VMS' annually....well, you aren't a VAR any more, so there goes 25-40% of the potential independent sales force pitching VMS to SMB's. A smart strategy for a small VAR would be to configure a small VMS server, stick Stalker Communigate Pro, MySQL (or Firebird if it were available), a decent IP stack, and good low cost backup package and sell it as an alternative to 2-3 Windows machines running Exchange and SQL Server to SMB's . They could also do small clusters. But HP won't let you get involved if you sell only $999,999 worth of HP stuff. So the VAR's gravitate to something else...Windows, Linux, Sun...... It's time that the VMS (& hardware) sales effort is co-ordinated out of Nashua only, with people there running interference with the rest of HP to make it simple for smaller VAR's. Other things too - like co-op advertising dollars for ads specifically about VMS - it's done everywhere else by vendors. -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:21:51 -0700 From: GreyCloud Subject: Re: linux kernel has major security flaws ... Message-ID: <4214E0BF.A72C8C70@mist.com> bob@instantwhip.com wrote: > > how can people even seriously consider running this > garbage when vms is out there? > > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21295 Simple: Linux runs on their PCs, VMS doesn't. And they'd at least try running Linux over XP. -- "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:36:19 GMT From: "FredK" Subject: Re: Looking for suggestions for bootcamp sessions Message-ID: wrote in message news:1108610162.337807.50030@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > FredK wrote: > > > It's like sausage, you might not really want to know what goes into > it ;-) > > > > I reality, VMS_LOADER.EFI doesn't do a whole lot except load IPB > (which of > > course is a vast over simplification). > > > > The stuff that happens on both IPF and Alpha between the boot command > > and the point SYSBOOT takes over is largely magic, and known well > only > > by a handful of people who actually have to make it work. > > I like sausage. I also like magic. I'm really interested in how these > .EFI programs were created, as they appear to be programs rather than > scripts. > EFI is a small limited purpose OS. You can write applications (programs) for it using toolkits from wither Intel or Microsoft. The applications can be anything from diagnostics, to a FTP file transfer application. One particular type of EFI application is the boot loader. The only thing "special" about it is that it calls the routine that ends boot services, and never returns. Most EFI boot loaders simply pull in the files they need to boot. VMS pulls in a single file (IPB.EXE) which is not an EFI application, but built on VMS - and which knows how to get SYSBOOT (again, there are other important things it does, and this is a simplification). > I'm looking at having to support some number of rxXXXX boxes that are > in remote locations; I'm not sure if everything that I want to do can > be done via plain EFI scripts. > > For example, let's say I have to replace my system disk and restore > from an image backup... > > On an Alpha, I simply type B DKA0 and I'm all set -- this is very easy > for my users to remember. My experience on Itanium is that the boot > information has some kind of disk-partition/other-magic-code stored in > the NVRAM, so even if the disk is in the same slot and bootable, the > saved boot information is different so the system won't boot. My > remote users are not the kind to use BCFG commands in order to change > things. This part can likely be done via a script, but it seems more > hackerly to write a program. > The problem you describe here is a real one. But no script or EFI will help. If you make an *exact* duplicate of your system disk using backup - so that even the GUIDs in the partition information are identical - then you should be able to slide one disk out, and another in - and simply boot it. But if the GUIDs don't match, then you need to either using the menus or the EFI shell, do something different. There is not really some script that you san write to help. The firmware people are working on auto-fallback booting (so you set up the boot list, and it will try each on the list in a loop that can be controlled). ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 08:29:45 -0800 From: kenneth.randell@verizon.net Subject: Re: Looking for suggestions for bootcamp sessions Message-ID: <1108657785.912704.210460@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> FredK wrote: > > If you make an *exact* duplicate of your system disk using backup - so > that even the GUIDs in the partition information are identical - then you > should be able to slide one disk out, and another in - and simply boot it. > > But if the GUIDs don't match, then you need to either using the menus > or the EFI shell, do something different. There is not really some script > that you san write to help. How does one make an 'exact' duplicate? My experience in using $BACKUP/IMAGE disk1 disk2 gives me different GUIDs on the two disks, even though the 2nd disk is bootable. For example, my system disk1 (internal 36GB drive in DKA0 slot): fs0 : Acpi(HWP0002,100)/Pci(1|0)/Scsi(Pun0,Lun0)/HD(Part1,Sig9DA11D31-7FFF-11D9-B359-AA000400FEFF) My backup system disk created with backup/image (also 36GB but in MSA30 box) gives me: fs2 : Acpi(HWP0002,100)/Pci(1|1)/Scsi(Pun2,Lun0)/HD(Part1,Sig968CC781-8039-11D9-9775-454E47323435) If I could make an 'exact' duplicate, this helps my efforts somewhat. > > The firmware people are working on auto-fallback booting (so you set > up the boot list, and it will try each on the list in a loop that can be > controlled). This would be good; I can handle this as I can tell which device I've booted from once VMS loads and gets started; however, it doesn't look like EFI firmware updates are loads of fun though. While we are at this, is it possible to change the SCSI ID's/bus for the 3 internal drives on the rx26x0? They handily come up as DKA0, DKA100, and DKB200 which I guess is why external drive shelves aren't supported on the 68-pin plug on the back on the rx26x0? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:31:46 GMT From: "FredK" Subject: Re: Looking for suggestions for bootcamp sessions Message-ID: <6y4Rd.240$QU7.38@news.cpqcorp.net> wrote in message news:1108657785.912704.210460@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > > FredK wrote: > > > > If you make an *exact* duplicate of your system disk using backup - > so > > that even the GUIDs in the partition information are identical - then > you > > should be able to slide one disk out, and another in - and simply > boot it. > > > > But if the GUIDs don't match, then you need to either using the menus > > or the EFI shell, do something different. There is not really some > script > > that you san write to help. > > How does one make an 'exact' duplicate? My experience in using > $BACKUP/IMAGE disk1 disk2 gives me different GUIDs on the two disks, > even though the 2nd disk is bootable. For example, my system disk1 > (internal 36GB drive in DKA0 slot): > > fs0 : > Acpi(HWP0002,100)/Pci(1|0)/Scsi(Pun0,Lun0)/HD(Part1,Sig9DA11D31-7FFF-11D9-B3 59-AA000400FEFF) > > My backup system disk created with backup/image (also 36GB but in MSA30 > box) gives me: > > fs2 : > Acpi(HWP0002,100)/Pci(1|1)/Scsi(Pun2,Lun0)/HD(Part1,Sig968CC781-8039-11D9-97 75-454E47323435) > > If I could make an 'exact' duplicate, this helps my efforts somewhat. > Frankly, I don't know. Hoff may have a way. Backup does a callback to hook the boot stuff up, including creating the partition headers - I don't know if there is a way to have backup do this so that a new GUID isn't created. > > While we are at this, is it possible to change the SCSI ID's/bus for > the 3 internal drives on the rx26x0? They handily come up as DKA0, > DKA100, and DKB200 which I guess is why external drive shelves aren't > supported on the 68-pin plug on the back on the rx26x0? > I've never really even though about it. I'll see if I can find out. But as to the SCSI port on the back, we routinely use these for external drive shelfs. The original box had a sticker (I think for HP-UX) that said it wasn't supported. And early on, VMS didn't have a U320 LSI driver (so we required a U160 LSI board). But that hasn't been the case for a long time. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 07:50:38 -0800 From: tadamsmar@yahoo.com Subject: Re: mandatory 7.32 update (in 8.2 ship) questions Message-ID: <1108655438.141224.67830@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> tadamsmar@yahoo.com wrote: > There is a mandatory update CD for 7.32 that > comes with the recent 8.2 shipment. > > But, reading the .txt files in the 7.32 directory, > it seems that one needs to apply VMS732_PCSI_V0100 > patch before applying the patch on the CD. > However, this preliminary patch is not on the CD. > And, the patch does not seem to be in any of the > quaterlies since 7.32. > > So, I guess I have to go to the web to find > the preliminary patch that is required before > I apply the patch available on the CD. > > Or did I overlook something? Was the > VMS732_PCSI_V0100 patch sent in one of > the quarterlies? > > Also, they did not ship a mentioned DECnet > phase IV patch required to get the full effect > of the upgrade, but this is a lessor sin since > not everybody is not running phase IV, I guess. Well, the DECnet phase IV patch mentioned is: DEC-AXPVMS-DNVOSIMUP01-V0703-2-4 Is not available here: ftp://ftp.itrc.hp.com/openvms_patches/alpha/V7.3-2 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:23:36 -0500 From: norm.raphael@metso.com Subject: Re: mandatory 7.32 update (in 8.2 ship) questions Message-ID: tadamsmar@yahoo.com wrote on 02/17/2005 10:50:38 AM: > > tadamsmar@yahoo.com wrote: > > There is a mandatory update CD for 7.32 that > > comes with the recent 8.2 shipment. > > > > But, reading the .txt files in the 7.32 directory, > > it seems that one needs to apply VMS732_PCSI_V0100 > > patch before applying the patch on the CD. > > However, this preliminary patch is not on the CD. > > And, the patch does not seem to be in any of the > > quaterlies since 7.32. > > > > So, I guess I have to go to the web to find > > the preliminary patch that is required before > > I apply the patch available on the CD. > > > > Or did I overlook something? Was the > > VMS732_PCSI_V0100 patch sent in one of > > the quarterlies? > > > > Also, they did not ship a mentioned DECnet > > phase IV patch required to get the full effect > > of the upgrade, but this is a lessor sin since > > not everybody is not running phase IV, I guess. > > Well, the DECnet phase IV patch mentioned is: > > DEC-AXPVMS-DNVOSIMUP01-V0703-2-4 > > Is not available here: > > ftp://ftp.itrc.hp.com/openvms_patches/alpha/V7.3-2 > Well, it probably should be here, but is not: ftp://ftp.itrc.hp.com/openvms_patches/layered_products/alpha/ and IIRC DNVOSI is phase V. You should e-mail George Pagliarulo ECO Release Process OpenVMS Sustaining Engineering Hewlett-Packard Company 110 Spit Brook Road Nashua, New Hampshire 03062 Tel# (603)884-1000 e-mail: george.pagliarulo@hp.com ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 00:23:57 -0800 From: Bart.Zorn@xs4all.nl (Bart Zorn) Subject: Re: Mounting disks during STARTUP Message-ID: Not really. If you find a disk which appears to be a shadowset member, you can mount it with the /INCLUDE qualifier and it will find its fellow members automatically. Bart Zorn helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) wrote in message news:... [ S n i p ... ] > As I mention, I have shadow sets. So I have to have a list of labels > somewhere, so I might as well have a list of disks. Or should I try to > mount all possible combinations of 2 or 3 disks and see which are valid > shadow sets by taking action depending on the error code? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:53:05 GMT From: "Kenneth Farmer" Subject: Need performance help Message-ID: <5l1Rd.2437$Go4.101119@twister.southeast.rr.com> Please email this guy directly if you're able to assist. Rajat.Gupta(at)gb.vodafone.co.uk I've also posted in OpenVMS Tech forum on OpenVMS.org: http://www.openvms.org/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=1533&t=1533 Hello , Thank you very much for the reponse. I want to know of any profiling tool avalaible for openVMS like gprof on unix. Actually I have a process that gives a performance of 20000 transactions per sec on linux machine but gives only 3000 transactions on an OpenVMS platform with maximum CPU utilization. I want to get hold of the limiting issues. Hope I made clear my issues. Looking forward to hear from you soon. Cheers Rajat -- Ken OpenVMS.org _____________________________________ Kenneth R. Farmer <>< SpyderByte: http://www.SpyderByte.com ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 08:05:55 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: NFS mounts to Solaris Server Message-ID: <9gwdDITlD1RL@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article <1108579875.304537.292730@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, "Jim" writes: > Jim and Bob, > > Thanks for your input. I have the nfs mount permanence set. . > > If I may ask one more question, is it possible to compile files on unix > from openvms? > The case sensitivity issue is getting in the way. > The more I look and think about it, I think we have to go to upper case > names. If I read this right, you have something like able.c on your UNIX system readable from VMS and you want to use the VMS C compiler to compile it? This should work. If not, please share the errors you're seeing. What you will have problems with is if your application depends on something like both able.c and Able.c, or using .c vs. .C for C/C++ distinction. The latter can be handled by specifically telling which compiler to compile which file. VMS compilers don't care what the name or extension of the input file is, the C compiler assumes it's reading C, the C++ compiler assumes it's reading C++, ... And you will have problems using default rules in MMS. Try gmake. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:33:47 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: <1108624898.4b72846fc2fcfeae325e3f1dfb4fadf8@teranews> leslie wrote: > > One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer > the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. Is there a NNTP server on VMS that supports user authentication ? Such a service would be a neat technology demonstration, especially if it were setup for free by hobbyists, a showcase of how simple it would be compared to the complex and expensive distributed solution sused by services such as akamai and the large commercial distributed news servers. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 07:43:53 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: In article , LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: > One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer > the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. Back in the early days of Usenet, didn't DEC have one of the important news servers? I think I remember reading this in an interview with one of the old-time DEC guys, on the web somewhere. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 14:24:47 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: <37jnpfF5dnfhaU1@individual.net> In article , LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: > One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer > the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. > Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET News is almost entirely IO bound. 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: 17 Feb 2005 14:26:25 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: <37jnshF5dnfhaU2@individual.net> In article <1108624898.4b72846fc2fcfeae325e3f1dfb4fadf8@teranews>, JF Mezei writes: > leslie wrote: >> >> One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer >> the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. > > Is there a NNTP server on VMS that supports user authentication ? > > Such a service would be a neat technology demonstration, especially if > it were setup for free by hobbyists, a showcase of how simple it would > be compared to the complex and expensive distributed solution sused by > services such as akamai and the large commercial distributed news servers. I can't imagine whatr solution they use but I ran a News Server for a long time and it was one of the systems that required the least of my time. 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: 17 Feb 2005 14:28:18 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: <37jo02F5dnfhaU3@individual.net> In article , helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: > In article , > LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: > >> One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer >> the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. > > Back in the early days of Usenet, didn't DEC have one of the important > news servers? I think I remember reading this in an interview with one > of the old-time DEC guys, on the web somewhere. > Well, in the really early days it was all based on UUCP. I think that eliminated VMS until much later when someone got around to writing a clone for it. 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: 17 Feb 2005 09:11:32 -0600 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: In article <37jnpfF5dnfhaU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > In article , > LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: >> One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer >> the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. >> > > Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower > than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET News is almost > entirely IO bound. I have not heard that VMS IO is slower. The physics of the hardware should be the same. What I have heard is that standard C IO on VMS is slower than on other systems, since it provides guarantees not required by the C specification. Certainly a heavy duty news server would use better programming techniques, such as $IOPERFORM. But I don't really see any market for such a product, so it seems to me the Internet is doomed to Freeware sorts of implementations on all platforms for this application area. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:23:25 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article <37jnpfF5dnfhaU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill > Gunshannon) writes: >> In article , >> LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: >>> One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer >>> the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. >>> >> >> Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower >> than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET News is >> almost entirely IO bound. > > I have not heard that VMS IO is slower. The physics of the hardware > should be the same. > > What I have heard is that standard C IO on VMS is slower than on other > systems, since it provides guarantees not required by the C > specification. > > Certainly a heavy duty news server would use better programming > techniques, such as $IOPERFORM. > > But I don't really see any market for such a product, so it seems to > me the Internet is doomed to Freeware sorts of implementations on all > platforms for this application area. Ah yes, the relentless pursuit of mediocrity. -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:40:45 -0500 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Larry Kilgallen [mailto:Kilgallen@SpamCop.net]=20 > Sent: February 17, 2005 10:12 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? >=20 > In article <37jnpfF5dnfhaU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu=20 > (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > > In article , > > LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: > >> One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would=20 > be to offer=20 > >> the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. > >>=20 > >=20 > > Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower > > than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET=20 > News is almost > > entirely IO bound. >=20 > I have not heard that VMS IO is slower. The physics of the hardware > should be the same. >=20 > What I have heard is that standard C IO on VMS is slower than on other > systems, since it provides guarantees not required by the C=20 > specification. >=20 > Certainly a heavy duty news server would use better programming > techniques, such as $IOPERFORM. >=20 > But I don't really see any market for such a product, so it seems to > me the Internet is doomed to Freeware sorts of implementations on all > platforms for this application area. >=20 Larry, I would agree that the "VMS IO is slower" is one of those old wives tales based on experiences with older versions of OpenVMS. As just one small example, recent versions of RMS (V7.3-1 and later) have the capability to emulate UNIX IO write back characteristics using dual buffer strategy. It is faster, but one needs to understand the potential ramifications. In addition, I highly suspect that many of the earlier testing may also have left the default highwater marking on drives and that that will also potentially impact write performance (target blocks are zeroed before write starts). Reference: (scroll down to section 5.11 new RMS capabilities) http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/731FINAL/6657/6657pro_007.html "OpenVMS Alpha Version 7.3--1 introduces a new system RMS write-behind performance option as a dynamic SYSGEN parameter (RMS_SEQFILE_WBH) to externally request RMS to implement the write-behind feature as a system default (refer to the OpenVMS System Management Utilities Reference Manual). If this system option is set, RMS implements the existing RMS user write-behind option as a system default (regardless of the RAB$L_ROP RAB$V_WBH setting) whenever write access is requested for an unshared sequential file that is opened for image I/O.=20 This feature is a system option. It is not the default, however, for the following reasons:=20 - Enabling write-behind involves a change in error reporting that could affect some applications. (A write error might be reported for a subsequent operation rather than for the write on which the error occurred.)=20 - The allocation of an additional RMS intermediate buffer might result in more page faulting if process working set quotas are insufficient." I remember some internal UNIX/VMS benchmarks whereby it was shown that OpenVMS was within +/- 10% of Tru64 UNIX numbers. Of course, like all benchmarks, you will always be able to find one that performs a bit better on one vs another. 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 has always had integrity .. Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .." ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 15:53:39 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: <37jt02F5ddkjiU1@individual.net> In article , "John Smith" writes: > Larry Kilgallen wrote: >> In article <37jnpfF5dnfhaU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill >> Gunshannon) writes: >>> In article , >>> LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: >>>> One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer >>>> the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. >>>> >>> >>> Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower >>> than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET News is >>> almost entirely IO bound. >> >> I have not heard that VMS IO is slower. The physics of the hardware >> should be the same. >> >> What I have heard is that standard C IO on VMS is slower than on other >> systems, since it provides guarantees not required by the C >> specification. >> >> Certainly a heavy duty news server would use better programming >> techniques, such as $IOPERFORM. >> >> But I don't really see any market for such a product, so it seems to >> me the Internet is doomed to Freeware sorts of implementations on all >> platforms for this application area. > > > Ah yes, the relentless pursuit of mediocrity. > I realize it disturbs everyone here's sensibilities, but take a look at just how much data is moved all over the world every 24 hours by those mediocre systems. 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: 17 Feb 2005 15:59:05 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: <37jta8F5ddkjiU2@individual.net> In article , "Main, Kerry" writes: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Larry Kilgallen [mailto:Kilgallen@SpamCop.net]=20 >> Sent: February 17, 2005 10:12 AM >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >> Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? >>=20 >> In article <37jnpfF5dnfhaU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu=20 >> (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >> > In article , >> > LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: >> >> One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would=20 >> be to offer=20 >> >> the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. >> >>=20 >> >=20 >> > Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower >> > than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET=20 >> News is almost >> > entirely IO bound. >>=20 >> I have not heard that VMS IO is slower. The physics of the hardware >> should be the same. >>=20 >> What I have heard is that standard C IO on VMS is slower than on other >> systems, since it provides guarantees not required by the C=20 >> specification. >>=20 >> Certainly a heavy duty news server would use better programming >> techniques, such as $IOPERFORM. >>=20 > > I would agree that the "VMS IO is slower" is one of those old wives > tales based on experiences with older versions of OpenVMS. Not an old wives tale, true for exactly the reasons you state in the rest of this post. VMS opted for a different disk writting paradigm and that brought with it overhead. Not an indictment, just another difference in philosophy. So VMS can claim it's writes are more reliable than Unix, but the price for that is loss of write speed. It is up to the implementor of a system to decide which is more important. USENET News is all about IO and the faster the better because of the sheer volume of News that needs to be moved (and read). bill > > As just one small example, recent versions of RMS (V7.3-1 and later) > have the capability to emulate UNIX IO write back characteristics using > dual buffer strategy. It is faster, but one needs to understand the > potential ramifications. In addition, I highly suspect that many of the > earlier testing may also have left the default highwater marking on > drives and that that will also potentially impact write performance > (target blocks are zeroed before write starts). > > Reference: (scroll down to section 5.11 new RMS capabilities) > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/731FINAL/6657/6657pro_007.html > "OpenVMS Alpha Version 7.3--1 introduces a new system RMS write-behind > performance option as a dynamic SYSGEN parameter (RMS_SEQFILE_WBH) to > externally request RMS to implement the write-behind feature as a system > default (refer to the OpenVMS System Management Utilities Reference > Manual). If this system option is set, RMS implements the existing RMS > user write-behind option as a system default (regardless of the > RAB$L_ROP RAB$V_WBH setting) whenever write access is requested for an > unshared sequential file that is opened for image I/O.=20 > > This feature is a system option. It is not the default, however, for the > following reasons:=20 > - Enabling write-behind involves a change in error reporting that could > affect some applications. (A write error might be reported for a > subsequent operation rather than for the write on which the error > occurred.)=20 > - The allocation of an additional RMS intermediate buffer might result > in more page faulting if process working set quotas are insufficient." > > I remember some internal UNIX/VMS benchmarks whereby it was shown that > OpenVMS was within +/- 10% of Tru64 UNIX numbers. Of course, like all > benchmarks, you will always be able to find one that performs a bit > better on one vs another. > > 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 has always had integrity .. > Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .." -- 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: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:59:56 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: Main, Kerry wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Larry Kilgallen [mailto:Kilgallen@SpamCop.net] >> Sent: February 17, 2005 10:12 AM >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >> Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? >> >> In article <37jnpfF5dnfhaU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu >> (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>> In article , >>> LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: >>>> One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would >> be to offer >>>> the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. >>>> >>> >>> Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower >>> than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET >> News is almost >>> entirely IO bound. >> >> I have not heard that VMS IO is slower. The physics of the hardware >> should be the same. >> >> What I have heard is that standard C IO on VMS is slower than on >> other systems, since it provides guarantees not required by the C >> specification. >> >> Certainly a heavy duty news server would use better programming >> techniques, such as $IOPERFORM. >> >> But I don't really see any market for such a product, so it seems to >> me the Internet is doomed to Freeware sorts of implementations on all >> platforms for this application area. >> > > Larry, > > I would agree that the "VMS IO is slower" is one of those old wives > tales based on experiences with older versions of OpenVMS. > > As just one small example, recent versions of RMS (V7.3-1 and later) > have the capability to emulate UNIX IO write back characteristics > using dual buffer strategy. It is faster, but one needs to understand > the potential ramifications. In addition, I highly suspect that many > of the earlier testing may also have left the default highwater > marking on drives and that that will also potentially impact write > performance (target blocks are zeroed before write starts). > > Reference: (scroll down to section 5.11 new RMS capabilities) > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/731FINAL/6657/6657pro_007.html > "OpenVMS Alpha Version 7.3--1 introduces a new system RMS write-behind > performance option as a dynamic SYSGEN parameter (RMS_SEQFILE_WBH) to > externally request RMS to implement the write-behind feature as a > system default (refer to the OpenVMS System Management Utilities > Reference Manual). If this system option is set, RMS implements the > existing RMS user write-behind option as a system default (regardless > of the RAB$L_ROP RAB$V_WBH setting) whenever write access is > requested for an unshared sequential file that is opened for image > I/O. > > This feature is a system option. It is not the default, however, for > the following reasons: > - Enabling write-behind involves a change in error reporting that > could affect some applications. (A write error might be reported for a > subsequent operation rather than for the write on which the error > occurred.) > - The allocation of an additional RMS intermediate buffer might result > in more page faulting if process working set quotas are insufficient." > > I remember some internal UNIX/VMS benchmarks whereby it was shown that > OpenVMS was within +/- 10% of Tru64 UNIX numbers. Of course, like all > benchmarks, you will always be able to find one that performs a bit > better on one vs another. I recall seeing the same data, probably in one of the inForm newsletters in the mid/late-90's. It's probably worth dusting off an Alpha and loading VMS, Linux, and possibly Tru64 on separate boot disks and doing the tests again if for no other reason that if a favorable result is found (+/- 1-2%) it could be used in closed-door discussions with the 660 accounts that HP talks about VMS with. -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:22:34 -0800 From: David Mathog Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: Main, Kerry wrote: >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Larry Kilgallen [mailto:Kilgallen@SpamCop.net] >>Sent: February 17, 2005 10:12 AM >>To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >>Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? >> >>In article <37jnpfF5dnfhaU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu >>(Bill Gunshannon) writes: >> >>>In article , >>> LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: >>> >>>>One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would >> >>be to offer >> >>>>the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. >>>> >>> >>>Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower >>>than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET >> >>News is almost >> >>>entirely IO bound. >> >>I have not heard that VMS IO is slower. The physics of the hardware >>should be the same. >> >>What I have heard is that standard C IO on VMS is slower than on other >>systems, since it provides guarantees not required by the C >>specification. >> >>Certainly a heavy duty news server would use better programming >>techniques, such as $IOPERFORM. >> >>But I don't really see any market for such a product, so it seems to >>me the Internet is doomed to Freeware sorts of implementations on all >>platforms for this application area. >> > > > Larry, > > I would agree that the "VMS IO is slower" is one of those old wives > tales based on experiences with older versions of OpenVMS. How could it be otherwise? Most of the users of OpenVMS have moved onto other systems and have no experience with the most recent version or two. Hard data speaks a lot louder than hand waving though. I did a lot of benchmarking on DS10s and that code is still available here: ftp://saf.bio.caltech.edu/pub/software/benchmarks/mybenchmark.zip Please feel free to run this on whichever platforms you choose, with whichever version of VMS you choose, and report the results in this forum. Personally, based on past experience, I don't expect to see any VMS disk I/O test come within a factor of 2-3 of the equivalent linux I/O tests on identical hardware. This is because the disk caching problem wasn't the whole issue. Equivalent tests to RAMdisk were also slower than on linux, and that's as close as one could get to apples vs. apples. Google for the post or look here: http://saf.bio.caltech.edu/ramdisk_vms.txt To remove the remaining factor of 2-3x would require a serious reworking of RMS. I'd be happy to be wrong, but you're going to have to prove it with real test numbers before I'm going to believe the slow I/O problem has really been fixed. Regards, David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:38:41 -0800 From: David Mathog Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: Main, Kerry wrote: > I would agree that the "VMS IO is slower" is one of those old wives > tales based on experiences with older versions of OpenVMS. > Note, for those of you who have forgotten just how poorly VMS did in these tests google in groups for: mathog blade ds10 mybenchmark and select the one with the subject: blade vs. DS10 on "mybenchmark" These results are also in the download link I posted earlier, but this will save you the trouble of unzipping that. Regards, David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:12:24 -0500 From: Dave Froble Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: <1119jior819529d@corp.supernews.com> Bill Gunshannon wrote: > In article , > LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: > >>One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer >>the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. >> > > > Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower > than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET News is almost > entirely IO bound. > > bill > I'd guess that there's more reading than writing in this environment. Before the advent of VMS systems with rather large (to me) memory sizes and caching, yes, I/O was disk bound. Now large amounts of memory can be used for write-thru caching of data and throughput on a VMS system is a much different thing. In the recent past a customer had their VMS system come up without the caching enabled, and they reported the system as 'broken' because of the greatly reduced performance. When caching was enabled the performance returned to what they had come to expect. On a VMS system that is not write-bound, I'm thinking that windows and Unix might no longer have such a perceived performance edge. Dave ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 12:16:25 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: OpenVMS Cluster to Replace News.Individual.NET ? Message-ID: In article <37jnpfF5dnfhaU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > In article , > LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie) writes: >> One way to give OpenVMS some much-needed publicity would be to offer >> the internet a multi-site OpenVMS cluster as a free news server. >> > > Considering that it has been stated here often that VMS IO is slower > than other systems that could easily backfire as USENET News is almost > entirely IO bound. There is no reason why a news server, or any application, can't make use of buffers in the I/O routines to improve performance. Data stored in news services are not likely to be critical. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 03:22:20 -0800 From: "Galen" Subject: Re: PDFs for HP C docs Message-ID: <1108639340.234912.297370@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Thanks to Warren and others, the PDF versions of the C documentation just showed up at http://h71000.www7.hp.com/commercial/c/c_index.html. I suppose the C++ equivalent will show up before long. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 03:13:08 -0800 From: Pierre.Bru@spotimage.fr Subject: Re: read monitor (>>>) variables from OpenVMS ? Message-ID: <1108638788.857671.294500@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> > OK, I had parsed your original query as a native English speaker. > Now I understand what you were asking. your' re right! my sentence can be read as: >> I want to know if a network adaptor is set to 100Mb full duplex, (either) with >> LANCP after the boot or with a >>> command, and I can not >> shutdown/reboot the alpha now. or >> I want to know if a network adaptor is set to 100Mb full duplex, >> >> with LANCP after the boot, >> or >> with a >>> command, >> >> and I can not shutdown/reboot the alpha now. I will use punctuation in the future :) Pierre. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:47:06 GMT From: Nigel Barker Subject: Re: rx5670 for $2K Message-ID: On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 19:16:38 -0800, "Tom Linden" wrote: >Anybody else get the offer? Now if only I could get it with GEM, >I could use it. > >http://h21007.www2.hp.com/dspp/prot/ne/ne_NewsDetail_PRT_IDX/1,1649,1908,00.html The rx5670 is not supported by OpenVMS. This 4 socket system has been replaced by the rx4640 which is supported by OpenVMS with up to 8 CPUs. -- Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:36:24 GMT From: Mark Schafer Subject: Re: rx5670 for $2K Message-ID: Yes, that is a mistake. I'll take care of it. - Mark John Vottero wrote: > "Keith Parris" wrote in message > news:uuQQd.188$Xu7.89@news.cpqcorp.net... > >>Tom Linden wrote: >> >>>Anybody else get the offer? >> >>Sorry, but it appears OpenVMS will not be supported on the rx5670. > > > Someone had better tell DSPP because they're sending e-mail to OpenVMS ISV's > pushing these machines and letting you order them with an "OpenVMS > evaluation kit v8.1". > > The web page (requires DSPP logon) is: > > http://h21007.www2.hp.com/dspp/prot/ne/ne_NewsDetail_PRT_IDX/1,1649,1908,00.html > > > > ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 07:55:07 -0800 From: jordan@ccs4vms.com Subject: Re: rx5670 for $2K Message-ID: <1108655707.613885.154270@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> > This was mostly a tactical decision based on timing. The rx5670 was > designed as a 4-socket PA-RISC follow on aimed at the existing HP-UX > base and came out well before VMS was ready. The rx4640 is a 4-socket > system that was part of the newer family of boxes comming out in the right > timeframe for VMS to jump on. > > Dunno if VMS would boot on it, I'm not sure we've ever seen one. Thats good to know, and reasonable; thanks Fred. Hopefully we won't be seeing any new I64 systems that are not VMS capable, and if we do that they aren't mysteriously less expensive than similar VMS capable boxes. Rich ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 09:18:40 -0800 From: "Ed Wilts" Subject: Re: set shadow/log bug Message-ID: <1108660720.643816.200320@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> VMS 7.3-2 Alpha. FIBRE_SCSI 4, Update 3, Sys 6 If you need more specifics, feel free to e-mail me (or tell me to log a call...) Cheers, .../Ed ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 13:25:43 -0500 From: brooks@cuebid.zko.dec.nospam (Rob Brooks) Subject: Re: set shadow/log bug Message-ID: "Ed Wilts" writes: > VMS 7.3-2 Alpha. FIBRE_SCSI 4, Update 3, Sys 6 > > If you need more specifics, feel free to e-mail me (or tell me to log a > call...) Hi Ed, Thanks for the info. We should have enough data to fix the problem. However, if you want an updated SETSHOSHADOW.EXE image soon (as opposed to waiting until it's in a V7.3-2 SHADOWING kit), then please go ahead and log the call. -- Rob Brooks VMS Engineering -- I/O Exec Group brooks!cuebid.zko.dec.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 07:59:52 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: Re: So how big a parachute did she have? Message-ID: Tom Linden wrote: > On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 17:58:19 -0500, Main, Kerry > wrote: > >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com] >>> Sent: February 10, 2005 5:44 PM >>> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >>> Subject: Re: So how big a parachute did she have? >>> >>> Bob Koehler wrote: >>>>> Its all part of our plan to make the US the 11th province >>> of Canada. >>>>> Course, teaching Texans to speak French might be a tad >>> difficult, but I >>>>> am sure they will see the value in this vision. >>>>> >>>> >>>> How do you spell nucular in French? >>> >>> >>> We don't use proprietary USA technology, we use industry standard >>> nuclear reactors. The USA is mad at Iran because it got open sourced >>> nuclear technology instead of buying the USA proprietary Nucular >>> (tm) systems. >>> >>> And in french, it is Nucléaire >>> >> >> And in english, it is nuclear .. >> >> :-) >> >> Kerry Main >> Senior Consultant >> HP Services Canada >> Voice: 613-592-4660 >> Fax: 613-591-4477 >> kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom >> (remove the DOT's and AT) >> >> "OpenVMS has always had integrity .. >> Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .." > > Speaking of Carly, > I spoke to a guy today who claimed that she recently interviewed for > Eisner's job. She was turned down, I was told. Guess she just wanted to cruising in the Caribbean on the company boat. -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:45:02 +0000 From: issinoho Subject: Sound on a PWS Message-ID: <1108630123.28097.0@doris.uk.clara.net> A few questions regarding using sound on a PWS, (i) Is the on-board sound card enabled and detected by VMS by default or are there console commands to switch it on? If so what? (ii) How would one check from VMS that the sound card was recognised, SHO DEV ??? (iii) Should DECSound work out-the-box? I get the following, DIVA error detected : %DIVA-E-ASSNFAIL, unspecified failure from diva_assign DIVA error detected : %DIVA-E-INVCHAN, invalid channel supplied (iv) MMOV seems to be the software which I need - is it only available on the CONDIST or is there some other way a hobbyist can get hold of it? (v) Any other utilities, tips or tricks regarding getting the sound up and running. Many thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:45:23 +0100 From: Keith Cayemberg Subject: Re: Sound on a PWS Message-ID: <421483d4$0$13228$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> issinoho wrote: > A few questions regarding using sound on a PWS, > > (i) Is the on-board sound card enabled and detected by VMS by default or > are there console commands to switch it on? If so what? > > (ii) How would one check from VMS that the sound card was recognised, > SHO DEV ??? > > (iii) Should DECSound work out-the-box? I get the following, > DIVA error detected : %DIVA-E-ASSNFAIL, unspecified failure from > diva_assign > DIVA error detected : %DIVA-E-INVCHAN, invalid channel supplied > > (iv) MMOV seems to be the software which I need - is it only available > on the CONDIST or is there some other way a hobbyist can get hold of it? > > (v) Any other utilities, tips or tricks regarding getting the sound up > and running. > > Many thanks. > I believe you can download the Multimedia support for the PWS systems here... http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/mmov/index.html Some other useful links are... Compaq Multimedia Services for OpenVMS Alpha http://www.sysworks.com.au/disk$axpdocdec022/progtool/mmserv22/runti.htm Multimedia - OpenVMS HELP http://zinser.no-ip.info/HELP/Multimedia Converting a DECserver 200 into a MIDIserver 20 http://www.vaxman.de/projects/midi/midi200.html The DECWindows Archive - Animation/Video http://decwarch.free.fr/video.html The DECWindows Archive - Audio and Sound http://decwarch.free.fr/audio.html DECtalk - Fonix Corporation - DECtalk http://www.fonix.com/products/dectalk/manuals.php http://h71000.www7.hp.com/freeware/freeware40/dectalk/ http://h71000.www7.hp.com/freeware/freeware50/dectalk/ http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/73final/documentation/pdf/OVMS_RTL_DTK.pdf Phil Ottewell's Free Software for OpenVMS http://www.yrl.co.uk/phil/pds/pds.html Flash Plugin for Mozilla on OpenVMS http://mvb.saic.com/freeware/extra/ HIFI STEREO for OpenVMS http://membres.lycos.fr/pmoreau/audiogb.html Jazz Midi Sequencer - The DECWindows ARCHIVE http://decwarch.free.fr/audio.html#JAZZ Lame 3_93_1 for VMS http://decwarch.free.fr/decwindows/ http://www.tmk.com/ftp/vms-freeware/decwindows/ madplay and MAD - MPEG Audio Decoder - TU Delft HREM http://nchrem.tnw.tudelft.nl/openvms/software2.html#MAD MPEG_PLAY http://vms.process.com/scripts/fileserv/fileserv.com?MPEG_PLAY http://zinser.no-ip.info/www/vms/sw/mpeg_play.htmlx MPG123 - Plays MP3 files from local files or URLs - OpenVMS Freeware CD v6 http://h71000.www7.hp.com/freeware/freeware60/mpg123/ MPG123 - Marl Berryman http://mvb.saic.com/freeware/submissions/mpg123/ MPlayer for OpenVMS (a porting project in progress for OpenVMS) - pre-release SW without support http://mvb.saic.com/freeware/extra/ ROSEGARDEN - Musical Notation Editor and Midi Sequencer - OpenVMS Freeware CD v4 http://h71000.www7.hp.com/freeware/freeware40/rosegarden/ SoX - convert various formats of audio files in to other formats - TU Delft HREM http://nchrem.tnw.tudelft.nl/openvms/software2.html#SoX Timidity MIDI and MOD Player http://decwarch.free.fr/audio.html#TIMI http://mvb.saic.com/freeware/extra/ tmk Archives - Terence M. Kennedy - DECwindows Software http://www.tmk.com/ftp/vms-freeware/decwindows/ VCS Aktiengesselschaft - dira! - digital radio solutions http://media.vcs.de/products/content/show VRweb - vrml viewer - TU Delft HREM http://nchrem.tnw.tudelft.nl/openvms/software2.html#VRweb XAnim - U of Texas http://www.utexas.edu/cc/vms/apps/xanim.html http://xanim.polter.net/ XFORGE Sound File Editor - The DECWindows Archive http://decwarch.free.fr/audio.html#XFORGE XMCD - Motif CD Player - ibiblio.org http://www.amb.org/xmcd/ http://decwarch.free.fr/audio.html#XMCD XMORPH - Morphing under X Windows - The DECWindows Archive http://decwarch.free.fr/video.html#XMORPH Cheers! Keith Cayemberg ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 04:13:58 -0800 From: "issinoho@gmail.com" Subject: Re: Sound on a PWS Message-ID: <1108642438.245191.87920@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Wow. Now that's what I call comprehensive. Many thanks. As regards whether or not the board is being recognised by VMS - are there any commands I can issue? What device does VMS use to refer to it? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:59:34 +0100 From: Keith Cayemberg Subject: Re: Sound on a PWS Message-ID: <42149536$0$24932$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net> issinoho@gmail.com wrote: > Wow. Now that's what I call comprehensive. Many thanks. > > As regards whether or not the board is being recognised by VMS - are > there any commands I can issue? What device does VMS use to refer to it? > Before you install the Multimedia Services for OpenVMS, I don't believe OpenVMS will recognize the existence of the Sound Card (which I assume is installed in your PWS). Then you can assign ports with the audioselectports utility. See the following page in the Compaq Multimedia Services for OpenVMS Alpha Run-Time Environment Guide http://www.sysworks.com.au/disk$axpdocdec022/progtool/mmserv22/runti001.htm#audioselectports_ch *Important* The following is taken from the MMOV Release Notes here... http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/mmov/mmov_release_notes.html The main focus of this release is audio support for currently shipping OpenVMS workstation platforms. Support is provided for these options: Compaq Creative Labs AudioPCI Card (also referred to as the Compaq Ensoniq AudioPCI Card) on the AlphaStation XP900 (DS10) and the AlphaStation XP1000. AlphaStation Sound Card (also known as the Microsoft Sound Board, and referred to as the MSB device) on the DIGITAL Personal Workstation 600au, and on previously shipped AlphaStation systems. Unofficial Support for the Personal Workstation Audio Device ------------------------------------------------------------ The file MMOV$ESSDRIVER.EXE has been placed in the Runtime Kit. This kernel driver has not been qualified and is not officially supported at this time. This driver will not be loaded and "enabled" by the operating system unless the following entry is placed in the sys$common:[sysexe]sys$user_config.dat file: device = "ES1888 Sound Card" name = AU driver = MMOV$ESSDRIVER adapter = XBUS id = ES1888 end_device The mmov$essdriver provides "msb emulation" mode operation. This means that Compaq Multimedia Services applications operate as if the Personal Workstation built-in device were a Microsoft Sound Card. Note that Compaq Multimedia Services will not work properly if both the mmov$msbdriver and the mmov$essdriver are enabled. Cheers! K.C. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 07:59:28 -0800 From: "issinoho@gmail.com" Subject: Re: Sound on a PWS Message-ID: <1108655968.423867.256890@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> Thanks, Keith. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:13:06 +0000 (UTC) From: gartmann@non.immunbio.mpg.de.sens (Christoph Gartmann) Subject: Re: Sound on a PWS Message-ID: In article <1108642438.245191.87920@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, "issinoho@gmail.com" writes: >Wow. Now that's what I call comprehensive. Many thanks. > >As regards whether or not the board is being recognised by VMS - are >there any commands I can issue? What device does VMS use to refer to it? Once you have MMOV installed you should get a device called AUA0: or the like. Regards, Christoph Gartmann -- Max-Planck-Institut fuer Phone : +49-761-5108-464 Fax: -452 Immunbiologie Postfach 1169 Internet: gartmann@immunbio dot mpg dot de D-79011 Freiburg, Germany http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/menue.html ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 07:56:09 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Speed of light as speed limit (was Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw !) Message-ID: In article <1108585597.909550.251500@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "AEF" writes: > > The strong and weak nuclear forces have an extremely short range, > especially the weak force. The range for the strong nuclear force is on > the order of about 10**-13 cm and that of the weak force is so small > that it is well approximated by a "contact force". The experiment showing the effect of the weak force propgating faster than the speed of light was done over a distance of centimeters. (Yes, I'd really like to have read the paper and understood how they pulled it off). And if I understand the forces, the limits of 10**-13 are a pratical rules of thumb, but IRRC they actually fall off asymptotically like other forces, making them non-zero (just incredibly tiny) at great distances. > I have recently been reading QED by Feynman and according to this book > it appears that the speed of a photon does vary from c but only over > very, very short distances. I read QED over a decade ago. Basically I think he said as long as Heisenberg allows it, you can, and maybe have to, get away with anything. > So this faster than light propagation of the nuclear forces must be > kept in context, namely, that it applies only over extremely, extremely > small distances AND in the realm in which the effects of quantum > mechanics are paramount, where position and momentum (which is mass > times velocity for speeds much smaller than c) are sort of "fuzzy". If in context basically means "within the nucleus" type distances, fine, but I know a lot of physicists who won't let anyone argue against a correspondence principle: the same laws apply macroscopically even though the effect may be nill. None of which change the practicle problem that spacecraft depend on electromagnetism and constrained by c. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 08:26:40 -0800 From: "AEF" Subject: Re: Speed of light as speed limit (was Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw !) Message-ID: <1108657600.665731.53090@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Bob Koehler wrote: > In article <1108585597.909550.251500@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "AEF" writes: > > > > The strong and weak nuclear forces have an extremely short range, > > especially the weak force. The range for the strong nuclear force is on > > the order of about 10**-13 cm and that of the weak force is so small > > that it is well approximated by a "contact force". > > The experiment showing the effect of the weak force propgating faster > than the speed of light was done over a distance of centimeters. > (Yes, I'd really like to have read the paper and understood how they > pulled it off). Fascinating. I am skeptical, though. We've heard of faster-than-light travel before, but in the cosmos. It turned out in the end to be a flawed analysis -- an optical illusion. Can you provide a reference for this new result? > > And if I understand the forces, the limits of 10**-13 are a pratical > rules of thumb, but IRRC they actually fall off asymptotically like > other forces, making them non-zero (just incredibly tiny) at great > distances. If you assume the Yukawa form for the potential, yes. But there's more to it than that. It's been too long since I've worked with stuff like this so I can't elaborate. > > I have recently been reading QED by Feynman and according to this book > > it appears that the speed of a photon does vary from c but only over > > very, very short distances. > > I read QED over a decade ago. Basically I think he said as long as > Heisenberg allows it, you can, and maybe have to, get away with > anything. Just as an aside, if you go to http://www.feynman.com, you can watch several hours worth of video of Feynman giving the QED lectures on a trial basis in New Zealand! You need real player to view it. I highly recommend it. > > > So this faster than light propagation of the nuclear forces must be > > kept in context, namely, that it applies only over extremely, extremely > > small distances AND in the realm in which the effects of quantum > > mechanics are paramount, where position and momentum (which is mass > > times velocity for speeds much smaller than c) are sort of "fuzzy". > > If in context basically means "within the nucleus" type distances, > fine, but I know a lot of physicists who won't let anyone argue > against a correspondence principle: the same laws apply > macroscopically even though the effect may be nill. Yes, but down at the tiny distances at which the strong force operates you have the "fuzziness" of postion vs. momentum, so it's definitely not like we can follow particles around as if they were billiard balls. You can't plot the path of an atomic electron, for example. So the conecpt of distance is not quite the same as it is at the macroscopic level. Therefore I don't think it really means you can literally just take this faster-than-c result and transpose it to the macroscopic world. Nature doesn't scale. We can't fly even with wings because we're "too big". Cells can only grow so big before the increase in surface area through which food and waste travel can't keep up with the increase in volume which needs the food and generates the waste. Examples abound. So what I am trying to say is that even with the correspondence principle, because nature is not scalable, things that operate at the scale of 10**-13 cm don't at macroscopic distances. Additionally, the Feynman analysis gives different probablity amplitudes for different speeds for light, the largest one being for speed c. On the macroscopic scale, the amplitude for c completely overwhelms all others. I think it is like waiting for heat to travel on its own from a cold object to a hot object. Not impossible, but fantastically unlikely to the point of being effectively impossible. > None of which change the practicle problem that spacecraft depend on > electromagnetism and constrained by c. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:20:03 +0100 From: Paul Sture Subject: Re: Status of devices Message-ID: <37j2dkF5cs773U1@individual.net> bhushann@gmail.com wrote: > Thank you for your prompt reply Mezei. > What I am looking for is, how to obtain all the other states the device > could be in other than mount and not mounted. > $ help lexical f$getdvi arguments and look at the item list. Most are self explanatory. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 05:19:26 -0800 From: "MDPlatts" Subject: Re: Thoughts about VMS ECOs now in .PCSI$COMPRESSED form Message-ID: <1108646366.644078.280540@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> I don't like the new format/concept either - it was common to get bad downloads or they just put up a bad kit which then of course did not expand and you got errors. The only reason for not doing it before seemed to be the FTP server did not handle long file names ok - so why as well as changing the file name change the format. Just do the former - but DCX the .PCSI$COMPRESSED file so we get the original dates and also know the file is ok. Now we may only find out its bad when we try to install it. Anyone know a way beyond doing "prod extract file" to test the kits? M. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 08:09:01 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: VMS and Comcast cable modem Message-ID: In article <42139dcb@cfanews.cfa.harvard.edu>, "Gareth V. Williams" writes: > For the past six weeks, this connection has been uninterrupted (the last > time it was done was when I had to shut the machine down to replace some > faulty memory cards): until four days ago, when my sessions into the work > machines froze. I've had SSH implementations just up and croak every now and then. I thought it was a bug in PuTTY, but it may be more common. I've seen it between machines at home conected by a swithing hub, and machines at different work sites connected via different ISPs. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:09:27 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: [OT:] Biometrics Message-ID: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050217/MCLE AN17/TPBusiness/?query=dan+mclean Flawed biometrics offers false sense of security By DAN McLEAN Thursday, February 17, 2005 Updated at 8:00 AM EST From Britain comes disturbing news that the country's politicians seek to introduce wide-scale "biometric" identity registration for its citizens. On Feb. 11 that nation's House of Commons passed in a 224-to-64 vote the Identity Cards Bill, which calls for the use of biometric identification cards and passports. The bill still has to clear the House of Lords, where critics say it will likely face stiff opposition, but if passed it's expected that biometric identification will go into effect by 2010 and that the documents will become compulsory for all British citizens by 2012. That could set a disturbing precedent for the rest of the world. Biometrics, for those who don't know, involves the use of an individual's physical characteristics -- fingerprints, for example -- as identifiers. These characteristics are scanned, converted to computer code and, in the case of biometric ID cards, embedded in built-in microchips as an ID number. A card can then be matched to its rightful owner through a quick scan of the relevant body part. Britain's Identity Cards Bill, if passed by all government levels, would mandate ID cards that include a citizen's name, address and biometric information such as fingerprints, facial scans and iris scans, according to a recent report by IDG's News Service in London. The collected data from millions of citizens would be deposited in a massive database called the National Identification Register under a plan expected to cost up to £5.5-billion ($12.8-billion). But it's debatable why Britain sees fit to so closely track its citizens and whether folks there would even consider potentially giving up a good measure of their civil liberties in order to feel safer. No doubt Eric Arthur Blair is rolling in his grave. Blair, better known as George Orwell, in his most famous novel Nineteen Eighty-Four railed against the brutal and intrusively bureaucratized governance of Big Brother in the ever-watchful fictional dystopia of Oceania. Does the ID Cards Bill have the potential to make truth both stranger and more frightening than fiction? Aside from the disturbing potential consequences to personal freedom and privacy, the technology of biometrics, so key to the British citizen registry plan, may be more flawed than is realized by those engaged in this narrow pursuit of public safety. It's no accident that among the wide range of security technologies available, biometrics remains among the least adopted by businesses. Beyond the fact that biometric-based security is extremely costly, there are fundamental flaws in the reliability of the technology itself. That fact alone is why many banks and credit card companies don't use biometric identification systems. In an interview reported earlier this month, for example, Johan Gerber, the associate vice-president of MasterCard International's risk products division, said that the "false positive" identification rate of biometrics is too high and the technology is simply not accurate enough. "We don't feel that it's ready to roll out just yet," he was reported as saying. One Canadian security expert is equally skeptical. "It's pretty easy to duplicate fingerprint scans," said Kelly Kanellakis, a technologist who has worked within the security practice of a North American communications equipment manufacturer. Fingerprints can be imprinted and "lifted" from something as simple as a soda can or duplicated with gel compounds, he explained. Iris scans are "static" or unchangeable biometric markers, which if duplicated by others become useless -- you can change a password, but you can't change your irises if someone copies a scan of them. Likewise, security experts say a facial scan might be lifted from a photograph. And what happens as we age or when facial swelling, surgery or some other altering effect occurs? Would beards be forbidden? Perish the thought, too, that a criminal might steal a person's biometrics-based identity card and likewise feel compelled to make off with the requisite body part needed to make the thing work. And then there's the fact that a biometric scan of a fingerprint, iris or face ultimately becomes digitized data, which although much more complex than more typical passwords and user names, is a data file nonetheless. And data can be gathered and/or decoded. Security experts suggest that ID cards with biometric information stored on them -- the so-called "smart card" -- are, from a knowledgeable criminal's standpoint, relatively simple to beat. A clever thief steals the card, strips off the biometric coding and replaces it with his own. Those in the know say the only truly secure biometric system is one where identifiers are kept, not on millions of cards, but in a central location. That raises yet another problem, though. Anyone with access to the central data repository where these digitized biometric scans are kept has the keys to a massive kingdom of potentially fraudulent riches. And these centralized repositories would become the primary targets of every cybercriminal type imaginable. A basic security rule-of-thumb contends that, if given enough time and enough resources, the bad guys will find a way in, so a central repository would exist as a fortress under continual and relentless siege by an ever-increasing world of marauding hacker hordes. Consider, also, how often in recent years there have there been reports of highly confidential data from banks and governments being stolen or mysteriously going missing. It's not an unusual occurrence by any means, and suggests there may be no safe haven. Regardless, the British government is spurred on by a perception of a dangerous and untrusting world, and forges ahead believing its measures will diminish fraud and protect the public. Proponents of the British plan to biometrically register the populace will argue that a safer society results from the use of such state-of-the-art identification and tracking. That it is a flawed social plan underpinned by questionable security technology is closer to the truth. ============= Doesn't security begin with sane policies based on rational thinking? Since the overriding root cause for today's 'security conciousness' stems from failed foreign policies, shouldn't that be the place to begin before everyone's civil liberities are eroded? As technologists used to dealing with a mostly sane operating system (as opposed to unix or Windows), the inherent inconsistencies in the flawed security approaches that we will undoubtedly be caled on to implement is infuriating - however financially rewarding it may be to do so. -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 07:27:52 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: Re: [OT] Speed of light as speed limit (was Re: DECW$CLOCK design Message-ID: In article <1117ohnh402gd35@corp.supernews.com>, Dave Froble writes: > I know of no research done from the perspective of the particle, mainly > because we do not have the capability of being on a particle at > lightspeed relative to an outside observer. Despite the way it is presented in school, relativity is not about observers. It's about reference frames. There is no difficulty in adopting a reference frame in which it is the particle accelerator that's whipping by at .999c and the particle which is stationary. We have measuring instruments that work at .999c. Muons generated by cosmic rays, for instance. Their lifetime is a "clock". And the observation of muons induced by cosmic rays is evidence that strongly supports special relativity. > The real question, which at > this time we cannot answer, is what's possible relative to the particle > that's at or near lightspeed relative to an outside observer. The posited answer is that the laws of physics are invariant with respect to choice of inertial reference frame. The experimental evidence is consistent with this being true and inconsistent with any alternate theory proposed to date. John Briggs ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:14:21 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: [OT]: Linux security pitch Message-ID: <5Ladnf90BeMzBYnfRVn-qg@igs.net> Got this in an Information Week newsletter today: The Linux Value Proposition This week's LinuxWorld conference has brought with it the obligatory storm of new announcements from the most prominent providers of the Linux operating system: Novell and Red Hat. Both companies are making a serious play to grab desktop operating-system market share from Microsoft. Both have identified security as a major concern among their customers. And both have become chummy with the tech industry's biggest players. If open source is all about mitigating vendor influence on IT innovation, what's the difference between Red Hat Linux and Novell's SuSE Linux (security certification of EAL4+)? Plenty, when you consider their approaches to the market. Novell's approach to the Linux market is to leverage nearly 25 years of software-development experience and brand recognition to assure IT executives that they're not entrusting their precious data-center resources to just any company. Red Hat, meanwhile, emerged just as the dot-com bubble was building in the late 1990s and charged ahead while other tech startups foundered. Although a lot of focus in the Linux market has been providing users with all the capabilities they'd become accustomed to over the past few decades with Unix, Red Hat insists that it's looking to outdo that predecessor technology on several levels. Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4, for example, includes SE Linux security features that provide a level of security previously available only in specialized "trusted" versions of Unix. The latest version of Red Hat is a move to marry high-level security features with the basic operating system. Such features include mandatory access-control capabilities to lock down user permissions and improved buffer management. In the end, customers will decide which model prevails. Novell would do well to match the level of Red Hat's independent software vendor support. Still, the purity of an open-source system is not as much of a motivation for business customers as Red Hat might think. What do you think? What are your company's key decision points when it comes to Linux and open source? Let me know. You can also read a more complete analysis at my blog http://blog.informationweek.com/002264.html Maybe HP should have a booth a LinuxWorld pitching "VMS - More secure than a barrel of Linux'es". -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 05:44:06 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com Subject: Re: [OT]: Linux security pitch Message-ID: <1108647846.897889.240390@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> so much for the security pitch ... http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21295 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:27:21 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: [OT]: Substitute VMS for Linux in this article Message-ID: It would be nice to think that VMS could get to even this point. Langa Letter: Follow-Up To Linux's Achilles' Heel Column Fred Langa addresses the most-voiced criticisms of his recent review of Linux problems, including claims that sound isn't that important in business computing. He also posits that high-priced commercial Linux vendors are on a suicidal course, unless they lower prices to accentuate their advantages over Windows. By Fred Langa, InformationWeek May 17, 2004 URL: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=20300852 The flames have mostly died out and the smoke is clearing: The response to the original Linux's Achilles' Heel article was astonishing. Many readers offered posts that were helpful, thoughtful, and informative. My sincere thanks to all who wrote in that vein! Other posts were, well, somewhat less helpful, and revealed deep misunderstandings about my original article. If the fault were mine--if my words were unclear--then I apologize. But I suspect that, at least in part, there may have been a problem on the receiving end of the information exchange, at least among some of the more fanatical Linux supporters. For today's article, I've read through all the myriad original posts and extracted what I think are the main areas of controversy, the ones that are ripest for clarification and comment. Let's start with an excellent, thoughtful and pro-Linux post from reader Rick Spencer on the general issue of Linux hardware support: Fred: Linux will never be directly equivalent to Windows, for many reasons. There is no "Linux Corp." like Microsoft to centralize information and resources; the development process is completely different; the philosophy is completely different. This creates a completely different computing environment. As an analogy, say you worked for Coca-Cola since Windows 95 came out, say as a bookkeeper. Your job has evolved since then, but you worked in the same building, on the same campus, in the same office, doing the same job. Now, nine years later, you take a job as a bookkeeper at Pepsi-Cola, across town, the same tasks and duties, but your environment has changed. You drive a different route to work, park in a different lot, walk a different route to a different building, use a different security procedure to get inside, go to a different floor, different office, different computer, printer, photocopier. Many of the things you took for granted at Coke are not even there at Pepsi. Pepsi has things that Coke didn't. You cannot expect them to be the same. Linux and Windows compare very much the same as this analogy. Some hardware isn't supported in Linux. On the other hand, it is trivially easy to select hardware that is supported, and build a modern, high-performance PC that' is completely Linux compatible, but because it is a different environment, you have to make your choices differently. Some manufacturers do not care and make no effort to achieve Linux compatibility. In another example, Windows XP allowed my scanner to work "out of the box" but required downloaded drivers and software to use the advanced features. The advanced features worked with Sane and Xsane with several Linux distributions "out of the box"--not that this proves anything. In the end, if one makes the choice to use Linux rather than Windows (as many have) they must realize that they have moved to a new environment where the rules of engagement are slightly different. Hardware compatibility cannot be assumed, as it can be with Windows. For many, this is a show-stopper. That's fine. Make an informed choice, and stay with Windows. But if Linux doesn't work with your hardware, it isn't because Linux doesn't measure up, it's because Linux is different, and expecting Linux to be the same as Windows is completely unrealistic. -- Rick Spencer This may surprise you, but I completely agree with Rick's main point that "...Linux is different, and expecting Linux to be the same as Windows is completely unrealistic." Unfortunately, many Linux vendors are now setting up that very expectation in their marketing, packaging, and pricing. I think this is a horrible mistake, practically suicidal. Remember, my original article was prompted by an experiment with a commercial Linux distribution that costs about as much as Windows. Both Linux and Windows were supposed to work with the test hardware, but only Windows actually did work. And despite the best efforts of the Linux vendor's tech support, nothing could get the installation fully working. (The exact problem was a failure with the sound system. You can revisit all the gory details.) When Linux is free, or nearly so, there's no reason to complain if its hardware support isn't quite up to Windows' level, or if there are other rough edges: You're getting a great price on a very good operating system, and the low cost more than makes up for any shortcomings. But when a distro of Linux costs about as much as Windows, it's entirely reasonable to hold it to the same standard, and expect the same level of hardware support. Trouble is, that support just isn't there yet for Linux. And that's my issue with many of the commercial Linuxes. It's not that "Linux is bad" or any such silliness. But by setting Microsoft-level prices, some commercial Linux vendors have set up a comparison they cannot win, at least not yet, because Linux cannot yet match Microsoft's levels of hardware support. Any Linux vendor that tries to charge Microsoft-level prices will inevitably be perceived as offering a lesser product. To me, the answer is obvious: The commercial Linuxes should reduce their prices. That will instantly reduce the expectations of the end-user community and avoid the direct comparison to Windows' level of support. Linux will again be a bargain, and issues like incomplete hardware support and other rough edges will matter much less. Name That Hardware While the above letter was general, many of the other posts were highly specific. The largest thread of posts, stretching across several weeks and under several headings, dealt with the fact that I hadn't detailed the exact specs of the hardware that failed. Many readers thought I was trying to hide something; or was secretly trying to stack the deck against Linux; or that I had some other evil motivation in not detailing the hardware. For example, check these four separate posts: "So a so-called journalist claims he can't get sound working on some anonymous system ... he refuses to specify the hardware used. What is he afraid of? Is he afraid that somebody might fix that problem? Or maybe this anonymous soundcard/chip doesn't exist? Why must that hardware be kept anonymous?" "The only reason he wouldn't reveal his hardware is he knows that it's Windows-only junk. He knows perfectly well why Linux won't work with it, but he makes us jump through all his silly hoops and never gives us the punch line at the end." "Can you name that mysterious sound card and chipset, Fred? Somehow you keep on failing to do that .... Why?" "Have you so completely given up on your career that you just make up stories? Unless you produce the hardware specs we should just assume you never actually did the test and just made up your article based on opinion and hearsay." (I've omitted the names of the writers, above, because I have no desire to embarrass anyone. All the posts are on the InformationWeek.com Listening Post, and you can read them there in their original context, if you wish to.) The omission was simple: I had seen no need to burn space in the original article with a list of the hardware specs because the vendor I was dealing with specifically said the system should work with their distribution (I had provided the support techs with a complete hardware rundown); and the sound chipset in question is listed on the Advanced Linux Sound Architecture (ALSA) site as supported. Thus, I thought that detailing the hardware was moot. The salient point was that it was supposed to work with Linux, and did not. It also was supposed to work with Windows, and did. But, as the above four notes show (and there were many, many others), some readers from the Linux community are deeply suspicious of criticism of Linux. To them, the salient point wasn't that a supposedly supported sound chipset failed in Linux; but that I was "hiding" something. So, to try to get the discussion back on track, I posted the relevant hardware specs in the discussion area. There were a few more posts in the "Fred is lying/hiding" vein, but most of those died out when the participants in the discussion saw that the sound system indeed should have worked. But then the discussion shifted, as the next item shows: The PEBKAC Syndrome Alas, my posting the hardware specs didn't help. Instead of clarifying the discussion and getting things back on track, things took a further step downward, moving from "Fred is a liar" to "Fred is an idiot." User error is indeed a common problem in all kinds of computing. In fact, support techs sometimes joke about "PEBKAC" errors ("Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair") or "ID 10 T" errors ("idiot.") In that vein, some participants in the discussion thought that simple idiocy might be at the root of my trouble with Linux. For example, maybe I couldn't hear the sound because I had the volume too low: "I know what Fred's problem is. He didn't unmute the sound. When ALSA is first installed, it's muted. You HAVE to unmute the sound on any Linux distro that uses ALSA. All this over nothing. Fred, do your homework and stop being an MS lackey. Don't know how to unmute sound? Let me teach you: Open up "alsamixer". Yes, it's commandline. Press 'M' to unmute the sound and press '+' to raise the volume. Now, as root, type 'alsactl store'. Your sound settings are now saved. It's obvious you have a bias against Linux even though you say you don't...." The advice above is fine, except that when a sound system isn't detected in Linux (or Windows), there's no mixer installed, so there are no audio controls to adjust or unmute. Running the mixer controls on an undetected sound system either fails, or (if in graphical mode) brings up a mostly empty dialog box. This isn't user bias or idiocy or a PEBKAC error, it's that there's no sound system installed to adjust in the first place. So no, the problem wasn't that I hadn't unmuted the sound. (Sigh.) Real Men Don't Need Sound? Other posts staked out positions I can only marvel at. For example, one suggested that sound really isn't all that important anyway: "If you want to play games and your MP3's, then boot to Windows. If you want stability, speed, or mission-critical use, use Linux/Unix." I don't know what that user does on his system, but I do heavy multitasking in my business work, and depend on audible alerts, system beeps, "task done" beeps, and the like to help me manage background tasks. A system without sound is harder for me to use because I either have to switch away from my foreground tasks to check on background tasks; or set the background tasks to steal focus and intrusively pop into the foreground when they need attention. It's much smoother and less interruptive to use a simple audible alert for those background tasks; and for that, I need a working sound system. No, it's not that a soundless system is unusable; you can still get work done on a silent system. For that matter, color isn't essential for using a PC, either. Heck, a graphical interface isn't essential either--we could all go back to 80x25 monochrome character mode, if we wanted to. But why should we? Used properly, color, sound, and graphics help you organize and keep track of a wider array of information and concurrent tasks than you otherwise could, and smooth the management of complex operations. Arguing that sound is unimportant is a little like the old joke about a general store whose slogan was 'If we don't have it, you don't need it." Except now it's "If Linux doesn't provide a function, you really don't need that function." To which I can only say: Baloney. Write Your Own Drivers Another post suggested that I should just write my own driver to support the sound system in question. I admit that stopped me cold, not because it was such a good suggestion but because it was so spectacularly primitive: I've been involved with personal computers from the start, and the last time I had to write a driver was in about 1981, when I was a principal in a small software company. Back then, there were few true standards in computing, and it wasn't that unusual for even closely related hardware and software to have cross-compatibility issues. Often, you needed to hack little software shims, patches, or from-the-ground-up drivers to get things working. And it was OK then, because there was no alternative. But that was more than 20 years ago. I was astonished to see "write your own driver" suggested now as a serious solution to getting a high-priced commercial Linux package running on mainstream hardware. (Remember: This was never about the free and hobbyist distributions.) Today, if you want to write a driver as your profession or as a hobby, that's fine; but for a full-fare commercial operating system to require that approach--that you turn the clock back 20-something years--is nuts. No mainstream, full-price commercial operating system should arrive in finish-it-yourself kit form. A Blubbering Wreck As time went on, the discussion sunk to a pretty low level, though I have to admit some of the imagery and language was colorful: "You were never interested in getting the sound to work, you were only interested in making a sensational headline, even if that meant skewing the results. Which would make you worse than tabloid journalists and completely compromises your integrity as a so-called IT journalist." "Go ahead, Mr. Langa, do your best to knock Linux; you will only ever find yourself a blubbering wreck on the Internet floor. You will only serve to help the open-source movement and rip another wad of cash out of Uncle Bill's pocket." Of course, my intent wasn't to "knock" Linux, any more than it's my intent to "knock" Windows when I write about its many problems. So let me state this as clearly as I can: Competition is good, and we need more options than just Microsoft with a smattering of Macs on the side. Commercial Linux distributions are increasingly positioning themselves as a viable alternative to Windows on mainstream business desktop systems. This shows up in the Linux vendors' marketing language, in their packaging, on their Web sites, and in their pricing. That's mostly a good thing. But when Linux vendors charge Microsoft-level prices, they're setting themselves up for a comparison they cannot yet win. High prices for Linux play right into Microsoft's hands. Case in point is that article we've been discussing: Despite having a sound system that claimed to be supported by various Linux distros; and despite being told by support techs that my specific system would work with their Linux; I couldn't get the sound to work even after days of effort, and following every single suggestion the support techs offered. I thus cannot use Linux on my primary PC for mainstream business activities, which require sound. It's not bias, or idiocy, or lying: It's what happened. But Windows, including very old versions, works on the identical system without the slightest hitch. And I believe this again shows why, in microcosm, high-priced Linux distros are on a suicidal course: High costs raise expectations, and Windows-level pricing generates the reasonable expectation of Windows-type levels of hardware support. But as of now, Linux comes up short in that regard. On the other hand, if commercial Linux vendors reduced their prices, they'd be defining their own playing field--- one where Microsoft is handicapped. Linux would be much better served in the long term by going back to offering inexpensive, robust solutions. That's a game the Linux community can win. Someday It Will Happen I truly wanted to use Linux on my best, fastest, newest PC. But I cannot--yet. It's not for any lack of diligence on my part, but because of a limitation in Linux. I'll keep trying. Eventually, someone will release something that will work on my system. More generally, someday, Linux will probably catch up with Microsoft's broad support for mainstream hardware. But that day surely isn't today. -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 05:39:51 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com Subject: Re: [OT]: Substitute VMS for Linux in this article Message-ID: <1108647591.142662.168280@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> so much for the security pitch ... http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21295 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:21:42 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: [OT]: Windows XP64 Pro RC2 beta Message-ID: <9NCdnWhTssEaK4nfRVn-vg@igs.net> Microsoft has released their near-gold 64-bit XP for x86-64 chips, with production release expected for Q2 this year. I guess this is what HP has been waiting for.... a perceived "good enough" 64-bit Windows to take away all reason to promote VMS. Why switch to reliable 64-bit VMS when you can have all the apps you are familiar with on 64-bit Windows - good, bad, or indifferent. -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 15:34:18 GMT From: Thierry Dussuet Subject: Re: [OT]: Windows XP64 Pro RC2 beta Message-ID: On 2005-02-17, John Smith wrote: > Microsoft has released their near-gold 64-bit XP for x86-64 chips, with > production release expected for Q2 this year. > > I guess this is what HP has been waiting for.... a perceived "good enough" > 64-bit Windows to take away all reason to promote VMS. > > Why switch to reliable 64-bit VMS when you can have all the apps you are > familiar with on 64-bit Windows - good, bad, or indifferent. Ah, yes, especially that now, with the new security-enhanced IE coming out, Windows will have no issues at all anymore... *sighs* Thierry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:54:35 -0600 From: Michael Clark Subject: RE: [OT]: Windows XP64 Pro RC2 beta Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Thierry Dussuet [mailto:thierry@dussuet.lugs.ch] > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 9:34 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: [OT]: Windows XP64 Pro RC2 beta > > > On 2005-02-17, John Smith wrote: > > Microsoft has released their near-gold 64-bit XP for x86-64 > chips, with > > production release expected for Q2 this year. > > > > I guess this is what HP has been waiting for.... a > perceived "good enough" > > 64-bit Windows to take away all reason to promote VMS. > > > > Why switch to reliable 64-bit VMS when you can have all the > apps you are > > familiar with on 64-bit Windows - good, bad, or indifferent. > > Ah, yes, especially that now, with the new security-enhanced > IE coming out, > Windows will have no issues at all anymore... Windows without issues?? What planet do you live on. > > *sighs* > > Thierry > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This electronic transmission, including all attachments, is directed in confidence solely to the person(s) to whom it is addressed, or an authorized recipient, and may not otherwise be distributed, copied or disclosed. The contents of the transmission may also be subject to intellectual property rights and all such rights are expressly claimed and are not waived. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by return electronic transmission and then immediately delete this transmission, including all attachments, without copying, distributing or disclosing same. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:54:30 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: Re: [OT]: Windows XP64 Pro RC2 beta Message-ID: Thierry Dussuet wrote: > On 2005-02-17, John Smith wrote: >> Microsoft has released their near-gold 64-bit XP for x86-64 chips, >> with production release expected for Q2 this year. >> >> I guess this is what HP has been waiting for.... a perceived "good >> enough" 64-bit Windows to take away all reason to promote VMS. >> >> Why switch to reliable 64-bit VMS when you can have all the apps you >> are familiar with on 64-bit Windows - good, bad, or indifferent. > > Ah, yes, especially that now, with the new security-enhanced IE > coming out, Windows will have no issues at all anymore... > > *sighs* I agree *sighs*. HP won't publically talk about VMS because it's the Killer Steath Operating System (tm) a.k.a. 'KSOS' - which is apparently only available to the US military establishment and 660 of its closest well-heeled friends (if you know the secret handshake). -- OpenVMS - The classics never go out of style. ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2005.096 ************************