Linked by znby on Mon 10th Jun 2013 23:15 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes "HP has announced the end of support for OpenVMS, the ancient but trustworthy server operating system whose creator went on to build Windows NT. OpenVMS started out as VAX/VMS on Digital Equipment Corporation's VAX minicomputers, then later was ported to DEC's fast Alpha RISC chips " before the Compaq acquisition of Digital led to their untimely demise. HP ported the software to the Itanium, but HP isn't going to bother moving to the last generation of IA64 and support will finally end in 2015." The article seems to have confused the end of support of VMS (which projected to happen some time after December 2020) with the end of IA64 sales for machines that support VMS and/or the end of support of the Alpha version of the operating system, but it seems either way that the venerable operating system is on its way to meeting the same fate as MPE.
Thread beginning with comment 564529
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: It's still my favourite O/S
by Vanders on Wed 12th Jun 2013 09:29 UTC in reply to "It's still my favourite O/S"
Vanders
Member since:
2005-07-06

HP has pretty much ignored VMS since they acquired it via Compaq so this is deeply saddening but to be expected. They've killed through mis-management and lack of advertising and programs to encourage it's use VMS, Tru64 and in the process killed two of my favorite CPU ISA's of Alpha and PA-Risc.

HP didn't kill VMS, the market did. No one wanted it, apart from the US government and some banks. The world belongs to *nix and Windows; that market reality was already well entrenched by the time HP bought Compaq.

While we're here, Alpha was killed by Compaq, again before HP bought them.

Disclaimer: I work for HP (but am not anything to do with OpenVMS)

Reply Parent Score: 4

voidlogic Member since:
2005-09-03

I think HP killing off PA-RISC was its big mistake though.

IBM does quite well with AIX/Linux machines running POWER CPUs and HP could be competing in that space with HP-UX/Linux on PA-RISC. Betting on IA64 was a poor choice, but I don't blame HP for that as Intel of course made the same bet. But at least Intel saw the daylight breaking through the clouds almost a decade ago and re-focused on amd64 *cough* I mean x86-64.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

I think HP killing off PA-RISC was its big mistake though.

IBM does quite well with AIX/Linux machines running POWER CPUs and HP could be competing in that space with HP-UX/Linux on PA-RISC. Betting on IA64 was a poor choice, but I don't blame HP for that as Intel of course made the same bet. But at least Intel saw the daylight breaking through the clouds almost a decade ago and re-focused on amd64 *cough* I mean x86-64.

Linux running on POWER servers? I dont see the point of doing that. The old Westmere-EX was only 12% slower than POWER7 on some benchmarks like SAP. Then we had several new generations of x86 and soon IvyBridge-EX will be released which is much faster than Westmere-EX. So why would anyone want to run Linux on an expensive POWER7 server, instead on an cheap x86?

Reply Parent Score: 2