Slashdot Mirror
VAX Users See the Writing on the Wall
Snot Locker writes "An informative piece at ComputerWorld talks about how VAX users are anticipating the costly migration to more modern systems. Several noteworthy tidbits, including hints of the port of OpenVMS to Itanium and the tale of VAX systems that have not had a reboot in 6 years!"
I didn't see THAT coming!
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
If any VAXs admins are reading this and are preparing to send their machines to the landfill, why not check to see if your hardware is on OpenBSD's wanted hardware list? They actively maintain a native VAX port (and it's damn good geek karma!)
Trolling is a art,
Seems to me that 6 years of uptime will have most likely saved the company about as much money as it would cost to migrate to an updated system.
...a computer that has literally run from since before Windows 98 existed until now without being rebooted.
Hell, with the critical-update-du-jour lately, it's probably hard for Windows users to imagine a computer that's been running since the previous week without being rebooted.
No reboot in 6 years?
Hahaha....i have a computer that has not had a reboot in almost 10 years.
In fact it's still somewhere in the closet.
I should plug it in sometime....
Slashdot Sig. version 0.1alpha. Use at your own risk.
About a year ago, we switched data centers, and had to power down our rack of x86 machines running Linux. A couple of them had redundancy in hardware (power supplies, RAID arrays, etc.), but the majority of them, working as a load-balanced web farm, had no redundancy at all.
Out of the rack of machines, nearly all of them had been up for the full two years that they'd been in the data center. Of the few that hadn't been up the entire time, *one* had a power supply die, the others were shut down for hardware upgrades.
Now, a year later, all of the machines are still up and running. I really don't have any doubt that a fair number of them would have achieved 6-year uptimes, had they been left in place long enough.
steve
Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
Lizzie Borden took an axe,
And plunged it deep into the VAX;
Don't you envy people who
Do all the things YOU want to do?
[Unknown]
the_VAX_writing_is_on_wall.txt;252
The fact that some VAX systems haven't had a reboot in 6 years reminds me of a story my HP/Compaq representative told me about the reliability of their Proliant servers. There was a server in a data center that handled user logons to the Novell client. One year the data center was remodeled but none of the servers could be moved because users still needed to be able to log on. So they finished remodelling the room and accidentally walled in the server. 3 years later someone finally decided that it was time to upgrade that server. When they went to look for it, it was nowhere to be found. It was still running after 3 years and hundreds of thousands of logons later. (They finally contacted the remodeling company and figured it out.)
Uptime of 6 years ?
Pah. My abacus (which has been handed down through 3 generations) has had an uptime of nearly 100 years. And apart from missing a few of the counters (I was a curious child) it still works great.
Them thar 'puters are just new fangled junk.
Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
You must reboot for the change to take effect."
[ OK ] [ Cancel ]
The article mentions SRI's Charon VAX. This is very expensive software that requires a USB dongle for licensing.
However, you can also run VAX VMS on a free i386 VAX emulator called SIMH. I don't seem to be able to get very good ethernet performance with SIMH. However, you can run NetBSD/VAX on it out of the box, and OpenBSD will run with a kernel patch. SIMH also has a PDP-11 emulator and includes images of the original UNIX V7 from AT&T (courtesy of SCaldera). SIMH is an interesting way to run both ancient and modern UNIXen without reformatting your PC.
You can also get free VMS licenses for SIMH/VAX. They must be renewed yearly.
Alpha VMS also supported a VAX binary emulator called VEST, which is mentioned in another post here. Support for VEST is dying, however (modern RDB releases have dropped it). The Charon VAX emulator also runs on Alpha VMS.
You can't have more than one person using a computer at the same time! They'd fight over the mouse!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
A few answers:
(1) People without significant training and heavy motivation could not learn how to use computers in the "good old days". We only had a market of maybe 30% of the population capable of using them. For computers to spread throughout society, this was not good enough.
The computer industry wanted to spread, for financial reasons if nothing else, and so they made the changes needed to make computers easier to learn and use for non-experts.
(2) Marketing. People want pretty things. People can be convinced to upgrade to something "better" by giving them more pretty things. Even if the old, cerebral games were more fun, the new, slicker graphical games took over the world because they were pretty, and because many of them took advantage of people's natural desire to shoot other people. (I have never understood this, personally, but it's the truth).
I have thought many times that older computers are better, mainly because they were more reliable, and sufficiently simple that a reasonably normal person could understand how they worked, and how to fix things if they broke. Today, I doubt that any single person understands everything going on in a contemporary operating system.
Few people seriously want to go back to the old days, when 24x80 terminal screens that cost as much as a used car were all the computing even well-connected people could have at their homes. I have to admit that I'm nostalgic enough to try and find a good used MicroPDP-11 on eBay, just to say I have one. That being said, I'm not sure how much use I would make of it, and all the weird programming restrictions would surely be archaic. But it would still be nice to have an example of computing history, when we all feltl like elites who might somehow wind up changing the world.
D
VMS uses a 64 bit date/time format that rolls over sometime slightly after the Sun runs out of hydrogen, so you're right, Y2K was pretty much a non-event to VMS users, even less than it was to Unix users. Unix users better start worrying about that Y2038 problem pretty soon...
DEC sales guy, to military contractor: "You're not our only customer, you know!"
Military contractor: "No, but we're one of the few with tactical nuclear weapons."
Seriously, VMS is/was great. I started working on VMS systems in the early 80s, did my doctoral research on them, and ended up managing a bunch of them for a while, before our department migrated to Un*x. I like to say that VMS is to Un*x as Python is to Perl. One is the ultimate in organization, the other is the ultimate in freedom.
It's a VAX. They're older than commercial electricity. Obviously he had his own gas-fired generator running it :)
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
VMS was a great operating system (except for I/O throughput). Anyone that was an engineer at DEC would say so. It was COMMON for those systems to stay up for years without a reboot (software upgrades did nto need rebooting), and it had a lot to do with the design of the software and the developers rather than the hardware. The OS had proper protections of resources and privileges, software was released with the constant concern of migration or backward compatibility, and languages all had a common call API -- making it easy to link objects compiled in different languages. Commands were user-friendly, and the GUI (if you wanted it) was X (Motif at that time). Remember that you could also not just control user privs, but about 32 other items such as disk quota, how much memory they could consume, the maximum CPU time before being forced to swap, etc. From a business perspective, a multi-user, time-sharing, reliable, networking (supported TCP/IP, LAT, DECnet, SNA, ...), and popular (DEC was #2 in the world) system was a good choice. The enemy was the mainframe -- a non-dristributed, expensive investment. It's sad developers that did not grow up in this environment will not be able to see it as anything but old technology.
- at -DEC
BTW -- yes, Y2k had little to no impact on VMS. It was designed to be date "correct" from the beginning. Extremely few Y2k patches for VMS appeared, and they were mostly for applications rather than the OS.
What killed VMS was being tied to the expensive hardware it ran on. When support for a sytem costs you 5-6 figures a year compared to buying a Linux/NT server for $1-$5k brand new, plus the VAX hardware was not compatible with other systems (except for the Alpha perhaps), you had to question it's value in your server room. Don't forget the large power consuption of the older systems as well.
If DEC had been allowed to release VMS for Intel as a product (which DID exist as a prototype within DEC), it might still be a viable choice today. I understood this did not happen due to the agreement between Microsoft and DEC when they partnered to port applications to NT and cross-train personnel for PC support -- a smart move on Microsoft's part, as it would certainly have prevented NT from catching on.
Even now Linux and Microsoft strive to achieve the same level of clustering integration VMS enjoyed almost transparently. Unix/Linux is much more flexible and efficient and cost-effective, but this comes at a trade-off of being more technical to use and with less administrative control. Eventually the "lack of applications" problem will fade away.
Hopefully Linux adoption can return us to those "no Microsoft products in use here" days.
Keith-who-was-a-VMS-product-developer-and-admin
---
Keith Barrett (kgb)