Linked by David Adams on Thu 29th Oct 2009 22:44 UTC
General Unix I had the pleasure earlier this month of attending a demo day at HP's Cupertino campus to commemorate the ten year anniversary of the Superdome server, see what's new in the high-end server market and learn about what's going on with HP-UX.
Thread beginning with comment 391909
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
OpenVMS on X86?
by shotsman on Fri 30th Oct 2009 07:57 UTC in reply to "RE: The IBM option"
shotsman
Member since:
2005-07-22

That will be the day Hell Freezes over then?

Seriously, if HP could kill VMS tomorrow then they would. But too many businesses use it. They find it sits there day in, day out and runs and runs and runs.
Last year, I decomissioned a VAX Cluster that had a cluster uptime of 17.6 years.

If by some chance HP were to have a sudden attack of Common Sense then the first complaints would be
Select 1 from below
Where's my MS Messenger?
Where's MS Word
Where's Photoshop

Sort of just like what people say about Linux

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: OpenVMS on X86?
by kaiwai on Fri 30th Oct 2009 09:05 in reply to "OpenVMS on X86?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

That will be the day Hell Freezes over then?

Seriously, if HP could kill VMS tomorrow then they would. But too many businesses use it. They find it sits there day in, day out and runs and runs and runs.
Last year, I decomissioned a VAX Cluster that had a cluster uptime of 17.6 years.

If by some chance HP were to have a sudden attack of Common Sense then the first complaints would be
Select 1 from below
Where's my MS Messenger?
Where's MS Word
Where's Photoshop

Sort of just like what people say about Linux


OpenVMS for x86-64 workstations and servers wouldn't be for the great unwashed masses but for high end workstation stuff that needs to be done, and massive multicore x86-64 servers serving millions each day. The problem with HP, it would require them to look long term, invest some money and stop being a bitch for Microsoft. HP might as well label themselves "HP, subsidiary of Microsoft" - at least it would be an honest reflection of their business plans.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: OpenVMS on X86?
by akro on Fri 30th Oct 2009 11:28 in reply to "RE: OpenVMS on X86?"
akro Member since:
2005-07-06

So short disclaimer I work for HP but

Realize that HP is really several companies.

The stuff you buy in Best Buy etc is from PSG and yes they are very Microsoft centric.

However ESSN (Enterprise Servers, Storage and Networks) is very multiplatform. There is a huge internal use of Linux and Windows, Linux is a first class citizen on all of our servers Itanium and x86-64. That includes support for RHEL, SLES, OEL, even Debian. Solaris is supported on our x86-64 gear additionally and is quickly reaching parity with Linux and Windows. HP doesn't just prefer Windows heck we are allowed to run Linux on our work desktops versus Windows when we don't have a business need to run Windows for a specific application.

The Itanium really has a sorted past with HP because toward the end of DEC's life Intel and DEC got into a patent dispute etc and Intel ended up buying most of the Alpha tech and manufacturing from DEC hence VMS and Tru64 and Non-Stop went to Itanium. HP-UX went Itanium because HP couldn't afford to maintain PA-RISC anymore.

Realize from an HP perspective Itanium runs every OS they sell and there a features that are absolutely critical to how Non-Stop works. Now granted Itanium seems a bit neglected compared to x86-64 but it really is the only chip that can run everything.

Windows\Linux\HP-UX\VMS\Non-Stop.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: OpenVMS on X86?
by visconde_de_sabugosa on Fri 30th Oct 2009 13:28 in reply to "RE: OpenVMS on X86?"
visconde_de_sabugosa Member since:
2005-11-14

OpenVMS for x86 already exists. It is called Windows (from 2000 to 2008 and 7, based on NT).

The NT kernel was almost a clone of VMS, made by the same designer Dave Cutler

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT#Development

Reply Parent Score: 0