Open VMS is old so it has to go

Dear Eva

Mike knows me - I'm a known troublemaker. I retired from the Tru64 UNIX QC group in Spit Brook back at the end of last June.

In your article, you said, 'Reliable sources in Nashua, New Hampshire tell me there's a bottleneck in the way and HP is called "hypnotised and paralysed" because of this.'

The bottleneck is named Shane Robison. He was anointed by Michael Capellas, er, Curly, as the CTO of Compaq shortly after his accession to the throne, discarding a few of the ex-DECcies who knew a thing or two about Enterprise-level systems, particularly the non-Wintel machines. It seems that Robison is absolutely entranced with Windows, and thinks that will save the Universe, and he's been plowing under OpenVMS, Tru64, and Linux for about 3 years now. Evidently, Curly managed to get him anointed to the same spot at The New Aitch Pee, and it's no small wonder that everything that's not made in or blessed by Redmond is being tossed into the rubbish bin.

The interesting problem is, of course, that there are a lot of customers running some very serious applications on OpenVMS, who have paid DEC/Compaq/HP some very serious Coins Of THe Realm to ensure that OpenVMS support will be available to them for several more years (~2007-9), and not from EDS or any other vendor. They want the Spit Brook crowd, period. Some of these customers, BTW, "don't exist" in Maryland (and, I rather suspect, Cheltenham). These customers are also the primary consumers of other Marvellous products, including Tru64 UNIX. And, given the way things are going in the Middle East, Mr. Robison may have to be told to, um, sod off, if I understand the British expression.

This is, of course, over and above the fact that everyone knows the Marvel will be able to out-run any Unobtanium for several years to come. Granted it was late to market, but I rather suspect that the availability of HP-designed Itanium-2 based systems in production quantities will be a lot later than HP and Intel are claiming. Serious customers would be well advised to get a Marvel with Tru64 UNIX V5.1B on it and plan on using it for several years before actually switching to an Itanium2. Remember, that it's HP's Longwood, Colorado facility that designed the Itanium2, not Intel, and it's untainted by any of the Alpha technology that was given to Intel.

Sorry to be so long-winded, but I'm glad I left when I did - I hear the morale in Spit Brook is plummeting, as you reported. Unfortunately, the employment outlook in southern NH, and northern Massachusetts is still very grim.

Cheers,

Email name, address supplied

----->

Open VMS is old so it's got to go, Windows is sexy and Open VMS is dull and boring so why should any one want it any longer? This is the kind of mentality I hate to say seems to frequently drive decisions in the IT industry, yet those whose job it is to make all this technology work really don't care about cutesy GUI's and gimmicks when it comes to critical systems that must work for their company to function.

Open VMS might be an ancient OS, but that doesn't mean it should be dropped kicked into the trash for an OS that gets a drastic rework every few years. There is nothing wrong with evolution instead of revolution, and one of my favorite sports cars the Porsche 911 is a great example of that.

You can throw the driver of a seventies 911 into a 2003 and they will feel right at home in it in an instant. Yet when it comes down to what counts in a sports car the latest incantation of the 911 can go head to head with the latest from the likes of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Aston Marten, or Lotus without needing to make any excuses about it being product of a over thirty year old design. That fact is the 911 proves that there is no need start from scratch to build a world class product.

The ironic part of this is those who are pushing revolution over evolution have or have had a Porsche or two them selves, or a coworker that has, yet they are oblivious to it being a evolutionary product, but that's also the sign of a properly evolved product, its hard to distinguish from its revolutionary brethren.

Unfortunately even if they where to make the connection they probably wouldn't change their path, Open VMS just isn't sexy enough compared to Windows, and Windows products are easier to see to big corporate executives because they feel like they understand it even though in reality the have no concept as to what they are really getting into, but that delusional false sense of security aids sales so Open VMS losses out in the end no matter how wrong that might be.

Jay Namon
Email address supplied

----->

In defense of Robison
Dear Inquirer,

(please do not reveal my email and name, I am intending to make an anonymous comment)

I have to respond to the aging DEC perspective offered this morning on OpenVMS and the HP CTO. It's not true that Shane Robison is anti-Linux, in fact he is a strong supporter. What he believes in is the maturation of the computer industry, with the inevitable winners being killer micros (Intel-class systems).

So he supports development in Windows and Linux platforms, and allows other technologies like OpenVMS and NonStop to continue since they are earning their own keep. I know for a fact that he strongly believes in Open Source and supports it within HP. Proprietary architectures and OS's like Tru64 Unix and HP-UX are on life support as long as they continue to drive significant revenue. The Alpha and PA-RISC are fast vanishing, and good riddance, they are slow and old despite what the DEC and HP gerentocracies may try to claim.

Anyway, I'm not a supporter of the politics inside HP, and many of the boffins consider Shane to be the devil. But please don't misrepresent the overall HP strategy of consolidation, industry maturation, open source and commoditization. The realm of competition for computer companies is no longer in CPUs or OSs -- the commodities are now eating the proprietary dinosaurs alive.

-- anonymous letter from somebody within HP close enough to know [Also known as Shane Robison, just kidding. Ed.]