HP Gives OpenVMS New Life and Path To X86 Port
dcblogs (1096431) writes Hewlett-Packard has changed its direction on OpenVMS. Instead of pushing its users off the system, it has licensed OpenVMS to a new firm that plans to develop ports to the latest Itanium chips and is promising eventual support for x86 processors. Last year, HP put OpenVMS on the path to extinction. It said it would not validate the operating system to its latest hardware or produce new versions of it. The move to license the OpenVMS source code to a new entity, VMS Software Inc. (VSI), amounts to a reversal of that earlier decision. VSI plans to validate the operating system on Intel's Itanium eight-core Poulson chips by early 2015, as well as support for HP hardware running the upcoming 'Kittson' chip. It will also develop an x86 port, although it isn't specifying a timeframe. And it plans to develop new versions of OpenVMS.
As a qualified Computer Systems Necromancer I've been disappointed by the lack of demand for combine technical aptitude with an ability to work with the undead creatures of nightmare. HP's plans are an exciting development for me and my colleagues!
I has them. I've been a huge fan of VMS since I first used, then later managed, DECstations at my university. Supported that platform for DECADES, and watched it finally go down the tubes under HP.
SO glad it's coming back!
I am surprised that people still want to use OpenVMS. I imagined that either people switched to Debian or custom OS or whatnot by the time HP even think of discontinue that back then
Finally a decent platform to once again write FORTRAN on. Oh, how I've missed you!
The Vomit-making system returns from the dead in zombie form!
OpenVMS will outlive us all. I really can't believe there are that many OpenVMS boxes in the wild. Can anyone list some applications still being run by OpenVMS?
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
There are applications that VMS does very well in. Clustering under VMS is unsurpassed by anything else.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
They're great for hustling governments
OpenVMS is still used where high availability is needed but rarely at the front of a stack visible to users. Were I work, it's the back end, core application server (OpenVMS 8.4 on Integrity blades in a C7000 chassis), that without much effort stays up in the five or six 9's range, we use 2 or 3 CPUs worth of processing out of 16 and nobody complains about performance. Two of us easily survive 24/365 on-call because there is rarely a call. Changes from the software vendor or our in house programing staff are weekly if not daily, so it's not a static environment. We have no intent or desire to move to something else, there is little incentive: it would take 10 years to convert and certify, and several million dollars that we could us elsewhere (the study was done about 4 years ago when we moved from Alpha to Integrity). All that said, there is a lot of work needed to move to OpenVMS to X86-64: I don't expect anything for 5 years.
Here is HP's page of links, but HP has neglected it like it has OpenVMS itself...
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/success-stories.html
You joke, but "nightmare" would be an accurate description for today's youth if asked to work with VMS. :-)
We are talking about a CLI (DCL) which is so out of date you cannot even edit commands which span more than one line.
There's also no nice modern 1990s technologies such as filename completion as well.
The filesystem (ODS-2/ODS-5) is robust, if slow, however. It cannot handle upcoming multiple terabyte disk sizes however.
I'm sure someone's crunched the numbers and this makes sense on paper, but seriously? Porting to Itanium before x86? I know HP wants to prop up its teensy niche CPU server line, but I just can't see how to justify that. Who's going to migrate software from old VMS systems to a new one on very highly vendor-locked hardware? It seems like anything likely to ever be updated before the heat death of the universe would probably have made the jump to Linux-on-x86 years ago.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
As an old DECcie I loved VMS, but then I was coming from RSX-11m. It made for a pretty good software development system. One thing that can really hold it back though is its file system. While it is a robust FS, it is very closely coupled with the OS. There could be some real problems if/when people want to run it on something like ext4 or ReiserFS. Bodes for a whole new set of drivers and fs converters. Sigh.
Why stick with VMS when you can get the same Dave Cutler design by rotating everything one letter forward, forming the WNT at the core of Windows Server?
Are you confusing Itanium (IA-64) with x86 ?
Itanium is most certainly not x86. VMS runs native on the former; it does not run native on the latter.
The sound of hands clapping by all zero remaining Itanic lusers.
no really, a decnet network for hobbiest, enthusiasts.
There are literally dozens of us!
man page writers need to read a few help pages. And attempt some task on a vms system.
context sensitive,
other commands recommended on the topic.
and you never had to remember what you needed ! HELP
Declare a platform dead one year, support it again the next year once customers had time to think about migrating away. Product strategist at HP seems to be a very nice job.
...community college that I attended over 25 years ago. I also remember, when Compaq purchased HP that I recall the development, of, at that time, the Alpha processor (believe that was the name of it) was a main motivator and that VMS would continue to be developed but then I haven't heard a peak-squeak of news since. Thought VMS was dead; glad that it's still kicking. :)
When can I get a Raspberry Pi bootable SD of this???
http://www.freevms.net/
Clustering is a big thing nowadays, but VMS had a working system 25+ years ago (albeit with weird proprietary hardware). They were doing things like distributed lock management way back then.
The horse left the VMS barn over 25 years ago.
I've been using VMS non-stop for 22 years, starting in college (on a real VT-100 terminal in a lab full of them in the basement of my dorm; used VAXPHONE to talk to friends back home; VT640s were pretty neat too) to today, writing new Fortran applications and supporting legacy FORTRAN applications that have their roots in the late '60s. We have a mixture of "old" Alphas, EV68s that still rock and have uptimes measured in years, as well as some new Itaniums. The older I get, the more I am amazed at how very well designed and DOCUMENTED!!! VMS is compared to any other OS I've ever used -- just about all of them it seems.
Aproximately 1000 years ago, in a galaxy far far away, I learned my trade on VMS on an old Vax mainframe doing cobol. Horrible horrible stuff. But it was a rock solid operating system with features that you just don't see anymore, and more to the point having the code out there so coders can see another way of doing operating system far from the Unix or windows mainstream has a lot of value in and of itself.
Heck maybe people might port it around (Difficult job though. The old VMS had a .... unique...... way of doing things with its register marks and bizaro addressing modes) which could provide options for people who want to utilize VMSs ultra-secure design.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
that link is to dead project that tried to write an OS to the OpenVMS API, it died three years ago and there was very little code produced
to those of us who know and love this OS. Very big. VMS is secure, stable (can run for years - yes I said years - without need of reboot), and the UI is about 99% intuitive (unlike unix/linux, windows, and others). Sometimes I think I'd un-retire for a chance to work in a good vms shop ...
Facebook went down for 19 minutes today. Estimated loss 0.5million USD. Not cost effective to move to VMS clusters. This time.
Bonuses all around! Good call fellas!
This time.