I hope that the year 2022 will be a decisive step in the recovery of VMS.

I would like to clarify a few points about my personal involvement in
France and the French situation.

I am proud to have contributed to the transformation of the DECUS heir
users club (hp-interex France) into the VMSgenerations association
focused on VMS. It is a contribution to a collaborative work that goes
far beyond my own contribution, and I am filled with gratitude and honor
towards all the members that this club allows me to meet.

This club is a success because it responds to a need and relies on
resources that have only been allowed to emerge. All of us in this club
share the idea that other clubs of this type should emerge everywhere,
specialized in VMS and contemporary to its recovery.

Since the creation of the club, I have made a point of restricting my
personal communications, and I would like to make it clear that
everything that has been published so far under the name of
VMSgenerations has always been the result of collaborative work in the
association.

The current situation in France and the behavior of VSI lead me to
seriously doubt my work. VSI rigorously ignores the work of our
association - except for courteous answers without real content. The
vast majority of French customers are very uncomfortable with VSI's
commercial policy, I don't know any customer who is seriously
considering a port to x86 and the general opinion of customers and
consultants is that VMS will disappear in the short or medium term.

Having worked on the durability of VMS can therefore appear as very bad
advice, and, for those who have committed themselves to it, at the very
least as an investment with no return on investment.

Unless there is a drastic reorientation of VSI's strategy, I am
convinced, like many others, that it will fail in the short or medium
term. It becomes ethically very difficult for an independent consultant
to advise to stay under VMS.

I would like to be wrong. But it is the same analysis that made me
anticipate the recovery of 2014, the contribution to the transformation
of DECUS France into VMS generations, both validated by experience, and
the prediction of a failure for VSI when I became aware of its strategy.
My professional relations can testify to my anticipation of the current
crisis as early as 2014.

The idea of a VMS takeover was great. Its implementation was completely
disappointing.

The investors' intuition was right: the intrinsic value of VMS had the
potential to become productive again in the new context of 2014. But
that intuition was not pursued, and VMS's value and contextual
consideration were forgotten.

What is the new context? The appearance of sustainability in the
economic landscape is the beginning of a development that can only get
bigger and bigger. For the IT world, this appearance radically
transforms the consideration of what has been called "legacy systems"
until now.

VMS was not conceived at a time when the concept of sustainability
existed. But its founding concepts of systemicity, backward
compatibility, local control and reasoned scalability meet the new
concepts of locality, sobriety and reusability.

The VMS revival is therefore an ideal laboratory for experimenting with
the new deal as regards (misnamed) legacy systems. Nothing trivial here,
because everything has to be reinvented in both purely technical and
economic terms.

It is worth noting in passing that the main investor had already
invested in legacy systems and is interested in green development. His
intuition did not come from nowhere.

But the implementation fell into all the (predictable) mistakes of a
relaunch that does not respect the specifics of what to relaunch and
when and where it is relaunched. VMS was relaunched as one would have
done for a sub-brand of Apple: a flagship product (x86), maximization of
immediate profits (the "clearing house" concept exposed by Terry
Holmes), no attention to the temporalities of the existing base,
unshakeable confidence in the brand (no marketing, no criticism of past
business practices).

Whereas a relaunch requires intelligent recovery from the previous long
time, transmission of positive achievements and criticism of previous
mistakes, and adaptation to what allows recovery in the new context. And
what VSI has systematically left out is the crucial question of the
transfer of skills and has completely ignored the essential need for
stability of the majority of clients, which explains their loyalty to VMS.

The disastrous results are there.

The centralization of profits discourages intermediaries, at least in
France, who were the best advocates of VMS. Only the big international
consulting companies resist, for which VSI has favors that border on
abusive competition. The exclusive supplier discourages non-VSI open
source development companies.

The focus on a single target (x86) that would be the sign of renewal
diverts attention from the long-cycle needs of the customer base. It
dries up the general investment, drains the cash flow and is one of the
causes of the product price increase. We find ourselves in the
extraordinary circumstance of customers paying for a solution that is
only on the horizon, a solution that they will probably not adopt,
because the current conditions of use of the product will discourage the
general management from using VMS.

But the most serious thing, which was structurally foreseeable, is the
impoverishment of the Boston center, a founding engineering in the
imbalance with the new effective center of decision and profit in
Europe. The Boston offices have disappeared, the data center has been
outsourced, and most of the key managers are non-VMSians. The Boston
center is a victim of the same trend that took place before 2013: very
high quality poses immediate profitability problems, and the trend is to
go offshore to reduce costs. It is easier to invest in integration,
service, which will be reconvertible in case of failure into external
porting services (alliance with Sector7).

There is the problem that Digital had encountered: complex balancing
between decision centers in the world. What we are seeing is a gradual
underground takeover from the European center, closer to the investor,
both by reducing resources and by appointing people close to the
investor to take charge. Seen from Europe, the billing goes through the
Teracloud entity for an officially American company, whose choice of
managers seems to come from Europe. Thus the so-called "VSI" entity is
really difficult to define, let alone its real strategies.

But the root of all the problems is that of the deep meaning of a
relaunch, which is lost from sight. If the essential importance of
fundamental engineering is underestimated, we move from the register of
transmission to that of inheritance. There is a difference between
allowing transmission between generations and pilfering from
grandparents' property, or violently succeeding them during their
lifetime. This calls into question the very core of the possibility of
VMS revival.

VMS is not (for the moment) a legacy system. The possibility of its
revival is part of the new economic trend of sustainable development in
the IT world. The excellence of VMS is passed on FROM THE LIVING of VMS,
which has nothing to do with a legacy. It is true that making this
possible is much more complex than simply doing legacy management.

For the moment VSI is only organizing itself within the classic
framework of operating a legacy system, which allows it to wait serenely
for the end of VMS. One of the consequences of this situation is the
inevitable reproduction of a conflict between old and new - nothing less
innovative than the conflict between old and new -. This explains the
chaotic competition between the Boston pole and the Melmo pole.

This analysis is anything but recent. This failure of a strong intuition
because of the application of classic but inadequate solutions has been
mine since 2014. In the current situation, I only have concrete
confirmation of this.

What are the concrete consequences for the VMS ecosystem? Either VSI
will empower the ecosystem to gain confidence in a "revival of the
revival," and a whole complex and very promising future is in store. It
is not difficult to predict that all players other than VSI will respond
with great enthusiasm to any proposal to collaborate with VSI, and the
wealth of inventiveness and excellence is widely available throughout
the VMS ecosystem. Or VSI can continue on its current path that will
make VMS a classic legacy system.

In both cases, the role of intermediaries and user clubs is
professionally important: each customer will be able to make the best
possible choices thanks to these expertise circuits: porting, freezing
in the existing system, modernization under VMS...

This confirms us all in our efforts... and in our expectations.

It remains to give a few points that seem vital to me in the first
instance for a better business climate with VSI:

VSI must have the humility to organize a thorough market analysis, which
has never been done

On 2022-01-27, Gérard Calliet <gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr> wrote:
>
> The current situation in France and the behavior of VSI lead me to
> seriously doubt my work. VSI rigorously ignores the work of our
> association - except for courteous answers without real content. The
> vast majority of French customers are very uncomfortable with VSI's
> commercial policy, I don't know any customer who is seriously
> considering a port to x86 and the general opinion of customers and
> consultants is that VMS will disappear in the short or medium term.
>

I very much know that the main problem is what happens if VSI goes bust
and the production licences expire, but you seem to be implying that the
feelings within the community are even more negative than that.

Is this just the case in France, or is this a general feeling elsewhere ?
We all know just how strongly negatively the new licencing policy has been
received in comp.os.vms, but is that true for the rest of the VMS community ?

If VSI could offer guarantees around licences if VSI goes bust, would that
reverse the negative feelings or are there other issues as well showing
up in France ?

>
> But the most serious thing, which was structurally foreseeable, is the
> impoverishment of the Boston center, a founding engineering in the
> imbalance with the new effective center of decision and profit in
> Europe. The Boston offices have disappeared, the data center has been
> outsourced, and most of the key managers are non-VMSians. The Boston
> center is a victim of the same trend that took place before 2013: very
> high quality poses immediate profitability problems, and the trend is to
> go offshore to reduce costs. It is easier to invest in integration,
> service, which will be reconvertible in case of failure into external
> porting services (alliance with Sector7).
>

Based on what I have read so far, I don't agree with your analysis of
the closing of the original VSI offices. As far as I see, VSI in the US
have just undertaken a relocation and just moved their systems to a
dedicated data centre. That bit I don't really have a problem with unless
there's more to this than I am seeing. Is there more to the relocation
of VSI in the US that I am not seeing ?

> There is the problem that Digital had encountered: complex balancing
> between decision centers in the world. What we are seeing is a gradual
> underground takeover from the European center, closer to the investor,
> both by reducing resources and by appointing people close to the
> investor to take charge. Seen from Europe, the billing goes through the
> Teracloud entity for an officially American company, whose choice of
> managers seems to come from Europe. Thus the so-called "VSI" entity is
> really difficult to define, let alone its real strategies.
>

However, the first part of this I don't like the sound of if it is true.

Is it true, or is it just your impression of what is going on ?

>
> For the moment VSI is only organizing itself within the classic
> framework of operating a legacy system, which allows it to wait serenely
> for the end of VMS. One of the consequences of this situation is the
> inevitable reproduction of a conflict between old and new - nothing less
> innovative than the conflict between old and new -. This explains the
> chaotic competition between the Boston pole and the Melmo pole.
>

I have not seen any reported examples of conflict going on here. Can you
give some specific examples ?

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 2:57:09 PM UTC-5, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-01-27, Gérard Calliet <gerard....@pia-sofer.fr> wrote:
> >
> > The current situation in France and the behavior of VSI lead me to
> > seriously doubt my work. VSI rigorously ignores the work of our
> > association - except for courteous answers without real content. The
> > vast majority of French customers are very uncomfortable with VSI's
> > commercial policy, I don't know any customer who is seriously
> > considering a port to x86 and the general opinion of customers and
> > consultants is that VMS will disappear in the short or medium term.
> >
> I very much know that the main problem is what happens if VSI goes bust
> and the production licences expire, but you seem to be implying that the
> feelings within the community are even more negative than that.
>
> Is this just the case in France, or is this a general feeling elsewhere ?
> We all know just how strongly negatively the new licencing policy has been
> received in comp.os.vms, but is that true for the rest of the VMS community ?
>
> If VSI could offer guarantees around licences if VSI goes bust, would that
> reverse the negative feelings or are there other issues as well showing
> up in France ?
> >
> > But the most serious thing, which was structurally foreseeable, is the
> > impoverishment of the Boston center, a founding engineering in the
> > imbalance with the new effective center of decision and profit in
> > Europe. The Boston offices have disappeared, the data center has been
> > outsourced, and most of the key managers are non-VMSians. The Boston
> > center is a victim of the same trend that took place before 2013: very
> > high quality poses immediate profitability problems, and the trend is to
> > go offshore to reduce costs. It is easier to invest in integration,
> > service, which will be reconvertible in case of failure into external
> > porting services (alliance with Sector7).
> >
> Based on what I have read so far, I don't agree with your analysis of
> the closing of the original VSI offices. As far as I see, VSI in the US
> have just undertaken a relocation and just moved their systems to a
> dedicated data centre. That bit I don't really have a problem with unless
> there's more to this than I am seeing. Is there more to the relocation
> of VSI in the US that I am not seeing ?
> > There is the problem that Digital had encountered: complex balancing
> > between decision centers in the world. What we are seeing is a gradual
> > underground takeover from the European center, closer to the investor,
> > both by reducing resources and by appointing people close to the
> > investor to take charge. Seen from Europe, the billing goes through the
> > Teracloud entity for an officially American company, whose choice of
> > managers seems to come from Europe. Thus the so-called "VSI" entity is
> > really difficult to define, let alone its real strategies.
> >
> However, the first part of this I don't like the sound of if it is true.
>
> Is it true, or is it just your impression of what is going on ?
> >
> > For the moment VSI is only organizing itself within the classic
> > framework of operating a legacy system, which allows it to wait serenely
> > for the end of VMS. One of the consequences of this situation is the
> > inevitable reproduction of a conflict between old and new - nothing less
> > innovative than the conflict between old and new -. This explains the
> > chaotic competition between the Boston pole and the Melmo pole.
> >
> I have not seen any reported examples of conflict going on here. Can you
> give some specific examples ?
>
> Simon.
>
> --
> Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
> Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

The "Boston" office is alive and well. It was moved to a location that offered hotels etc. much closer than existed in Bolton Ma. As far as outsourcing goes, I suspect that it was cheaper to house the machines in a datacenter rather than have a private center built. These data centers have multiple power sources (2 separate feeds into the facility) as well as generator power and have multiple internet feeds as well (from multiple carriers). Having to install and support such redundancy in your own facility gets real expensive really quickly.

Yes, some of management has changed, but some of the "old" VMS guys are retiring too. Can't blame them. As far as I know, the core VMS engineering folks are still there with additions to carry on the tradition.

Dan (not affiliated with VSI at all)

Le 27/01/2022 à 21:05, abrsvc a écrit :
> Yes, some of management has changed, but some of the "old" VMS guys are retiring too.
(there are a lot of issue to be talked about, and every one can have
different opinions)
But here do you really think Jim Janetos had just realized six months
after getting his function he had to retire?
Yes, yes he had just forgotten, there is not any problem. And himself,
if necessary, would say that. As everyone quitting a company and not
willing be bad.

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 4:07:45 PM UTC-5, Gérard Calliet wrote:
> Le 27/01/2022 à 21:05, abrsvc a écrit :
> > Yes, some of management has changed, but some of the "old" VMS guys are retiring too.
> (there are a lot of issue to be talked about, and every one can have
> different opinions)
> But here do you really think Jim Janetos had just realized six months
> after getting his function he had to retire?
> Yes, yes he had just forgotten, there is not any problem. And himself,
> if necessary, would say that. As everyone quitting a company and not
> willing be bad.
> --
> L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus

I don't know, but having met the man, I believe that he took the position when it became available to keep things going. Jim impressed me as more of an engineering guy than a CEO. You would need to ask him why he decided to retire.

Le 27/01/2022 à 20:57, Simon Clubley a écrit :
> On 2022-01-27, Gérard Calliet <gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr> wrote:
>>
>> The current situation in France and the behavior of VSI lead me to
>> seriously doubt my work. VSI rigorously ignores the work of our
>> association - except for courteous answers without real content. The
>> vast majority of French customers are very uncomfortable with VSI's
>> commercial policy, I don't know any customer who is seriously
>> considering a port to x86 and the general opinion of customers and
>> consultants is that VMS will disappear in the short or medium term.
>>
>
> I very much know that the main problem is what happens if VSI goes bust
> and the production licences expire, but you seem to be implying that the
> feelings within the community are even more negative than that.
>
> Is this just the case in France, or is this a general feeling elsewhere ?
It is part of my question. We cannot know anything else that we know
localy. Not any information from VSI... on any subject. We cannot do
anything but hypothesis.
> We all know just how strongly negatively the new licencing policy has been
> received in comp.os.vms, but is that true for the rest of the VMS community ?
>
> If VSI could offer guarantees around licences if VSI goes bust, would that
> reverse the negative feelings or are there other issues as well showing
> up in France ?
No. In france they all feel the pricing is unfair, creating by itself an
unbearable dependency with the supplier, who can change the rules every
time he likes.
>
>>
>> But the most serious thing, which was structurally foreseeable, is the
>> impoverishment of the Boston center, a founding engineering in the
>> imbalance with the new effective center of decision and profit in
>> Europe. The Boston offices have disappeared, the data center has been
>> outsourced, and most of the key managers are non-VMSians. The Boston
>> center is a victim of the same trend that took place before 2013: very
>> high quality poses immediate profitability problems, and the trend is to
>> go offshore to reduce costs. It is easier to invest in integration,
>> service, which will be reconvertible in case of failure into external
>> porting services (alliance with Sector7).
>>
>
> Based on what I have read so far, I don't agree with your analysis of
> the closing of the original VSI offices. As far as I see, VSI in the US
> have just undertaken a relocation and just moved their systems to a
> dedicated data centre. That bit I don't really have a problem with unless
> there's more to this than I am seeing. Is there more to the relocation
> of VSI in the US that I am not seeing ?
I will give the links about the dedicated center. It is Century21, I
think. It is one of the company the chair man had. I saw the youtube
presenting the operation: "everything is fine with virtualisation, bla,
bla..." . Where are gone the strict operations of testing? I don't know.
My problem is not about one fact, but about a conjunction of facts,
which seems to be a trend. And yes, as for everything, hypothesis.
Because we don't get any real information.
>
>> There is the problem that Digital had encountered: complex balancing
>> between decision centers in the world. What we are seeing is a gradual
>> underground takeover from the European center, closer to the investor,
>> both by reducing resources and by appointing people close to the
>> investor to take charge. Seen from Europe, the billing goes through the
>> Teracloud entity for an officially American company, whose choice of
>> managers seems to come from Europe. Thus the so-called "VSI" entity is
>> really difficult to define, let alone its real strategies.
>>
>
> However, the first part of this I don't like the sound of if it is true.
>
> Is it true, or is it just your impression of what is going on ?
It is my interpretation. But how can be interpreted all the changes for
ceo? The question is who really has the power of decision? A plane where
the pilot is fantomatic, and where not any information is done to the
passenger about the destination, do you think you'll use it?
>
>>
>> For the moment VSI is only organizing itself within the classic
>> framework of operating a legacy system, which allows it to wait serenely
>> for the end of VMS. One of the consequences of this situation is the
>> inevitable reproduction of a conflict between old and new - nothing less
>> innovative than the conflict between old and new -. This explains the
>> chaotic competition between the Boston pole and the Melmo pole.
>>
>
> I have not seen any reported examples of conflict going on here. Can you
> give some specific examples ?
I'm not part of VSI. But, for example it is not understandable the chief
of the engineering with not any VMS experience, placed here because of
his history with the european investor. Cannot we see here a non
official power fight? Who is conducting the off-shore ressources in est
europe, but not part of the official board? What are the relations
between the official and the non official direction? Why do I pay
Teracloud for VSI bills? etc,...
>
> Simon.
>

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 1/27/2022 4:37 PM, Gérard Calliet wrote:
> Le 27/01/2022 à 20:57, Simon Clubley a écrit :
>> On 2022-01-27, Gérard Calliet <gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr> wrote:
>>> But the most serious thing, which was structurally foreseeable, is the
>>> impoverishment of the Boston center, a founding engineering in the
>>> imbalance with the new effective center of decision and profit in
>>> Europe. The Boston offices have disappeared, the data center has been
>>> outsourced, and most of the key managers are non-VMSians. The Boston
>>> center is a victim of the same trend that took place before 2013: very
>>> high quality poses immediate profitability problems, and the trend is to
>>> go offshore to reduce costs. It is easier to invest in integration,
>>> service, which will be reconvertible in case of failure into external
>>> porting services (alliance with Sector7).
>>
>> Based on what I have read so far, I don't agree with your analysis of
>> the closing of the original VSI offices. As far as I see, VSI in the US
>> have just undertaken a relocation and just moved their systems to a
>> dedicated data centre. That bit I don't really have a problem with unless
>> there's more to this than I am seeing. Is there more to the relocation
>> of VSI in the US that I am not seeing ?

> I will give the links about the dedicated center. It is Century21, I
> think. It is one of the company the chair man had. I saw the youtube
> presenting the operation: "everything is fine with virtualisation, bla,
> bla..." . Where are gone the strict operations of testing? I don't know.
> My problem is not about one fact, but about a conjunction of facts,
> which seems to be a trend. And yes, as for everything, hypothesis.
> Because we don't get any real information.

It is not common for companies to discuss the hosting of their
internal IT in public. In fact it is practically never happening.

>>> There is the problem that Digital had encountered: complex balancing
>>> between decision centers in the world. What we are seeing is a gradual
>>> underground takeover from the European center, closer to the investor,
>>> both by reducing resources and by appointing people close to the
>>> investor to take charge. Seen from Europe, the billing goes through the
>>> Teracloud entity for an officially American company, whose choice of
>>> managers seems to come from Europe. Thus the so-called "VSI" entity is
>>> really difficult to define, let alone its real strategies.
>>
>> However, the first part of this I don't like the sound of if it is true.
>>
>> Is it true, or is it just your impression of what is going on ?
> It is my interpretation. But how can be interpreted all the changes for
> ceo? The question is who really has the power of decision? A plane where
> the pilot is fantomatic, and where not any information is done to the
> passenger about the destination, do you think you'll use it?

I would assume VSI works like any other company.

The owners (shareholders) elect a board that they think
will make the right decisions, the board (and the chair person)
tell CEO and senior management of the company what strategic
direction they want and CEO and senior management execute
based on that strategic direction.

>>> For the moment VSI is only organizing itself within the classic
>>> framework of operating a legacy system, which allows it to wait serenely
>>> for the end of VMS. One of the consequences of this situation is the
>>> inevitable reproduction of a conflict between old and new - nothing less
>>> innovative than the conflict between old and new -. This explains the
>>> chaotic competition between the Boston pole and the Melmo pole.
>>
>> I have not seen any reported examples of conflict going on here. Can you
>> give some specific examples ?

> I'm not part of VSI. But, for example it is not understandable the chief
> of the engineering with not any VMS experience, placed here because of
> his history with the european investor. Cannot we see here a non
> official power fight?

As far as I can see then he has 25 years of experience
leading software development teams.

The fact that he has not worked with VMS before joining VSI
does not seem particular relevant to me. I do not expect
the VP of engineering to write any code and managing
engineers does not depend on the specific code. He probably
had to spend a few weeks learning about the tasks and teams,
but that is normal every time a company hires externally.

Arne

Le 27/01/2022 à 22:20, John Dallman a écrit :
> If you could express yourselves much more concisely, you might get better
> results.
You are absolutely right. This has always been my problem.

I am confronted with several contradictory necessities. The ongoing
failure of VSI deserves a book, by the complexity of what is at stake. A
working model to do would be "digital is dead, long live dec". I have
neither the means nor the time to undertake this work. And an autopsy is
easier than a diagnosis anyway.

The complexity is linked to the fact that there are several levels of
analysis that must be taken into account:
- Purely technical problems: you need x86
- Agenda problems: what rhythm to adopt
- As a result, the pace and ratio of investments
- Current market situation
- Customer motivations in the current market
- Target markets to conquer
- Availability of resources

So far, classic issues. But other levels of analysis are added for a
relaunch in general and for the relaunch of VMS in particular:
- Results of the previous phase
- Critique of the previous phase
- Choice of the positive to take back and the negative to eliminate
- Opportunity analysis: why, when there has been exhaustion, an
opportunity makes a rebound possible

These two sets remain factual, there is a level, often unnoticed, which
is the set of theories used for the analyses:
- These theories establish which methods
- Are these theories definitively established, or on the contrary the
event of the recovery demonstrates their weaknesses, and they need to be
reformulated?
- What new theories would be interesting tools to use?

It then remains to ask with whom all these questions should be studied,
and in what order (deductive, inductive, a bit of both?)

Finally, all this in the situation of a patent failure which adds many
difficulties.

In the emergency situation that led me to write these few pages, there
is a great mixture of attempts to answer the various problems. Sorry
then. I regretted my barely written submission. What would excuse it is
the sense of urgency in the face of a failure that is almost universally
announced. But I really believe that there is no reason to be defeatist,
so we must know how to respond to everything that announces defeat. I
recognize the ridiculousness of issuing warnings, but what else can we do?

So, for you, and also for all those who have been kind enough to follow
this thread:

1) There is an actual crisis - at least as seen from France - and it is
not a crisis.

2) This crisis is not taken into account by VSI

3) x86 is necessary, but making it the top priority has been a mistake:
constitution of a vanguard that separates itself from the rearguard; no
problem on the necessity, agenda mistake

4) VSI is creating a desert around it: no marketing, no community
encouragement, discouragement of intermediaries; the ecosystem is
heading for implosion

5) Points 1 to 4 do not exist without reason (passage to the theoretical
level): the concept of recovery or relaunch has not been grasped and one
is content to treat VMS alternatively either as a "modern OS like all
the others when we will be on x86" or as a "legacy system", one being as
false as the other [inductive analysis from the failure situation].

6) Point 5 implies in this unacknowledged balance of power issues that
are not understood and an appearance of conflict between "the old and
the new" [deductive analysis].

I apologize for the probably pretentiousness of this presentation. If it
can be an excuse, I consider that the respect due to an audience as
learned and experienced as c.o.v. implies to entrust them with complex
things.

I come back to the "Digital is dead, long live DEC" reference. I always
have this reference in mind, following two ways of thinking: on the one
hand, the decisive importance of the (several) lives of Digital in the
history of computing, and therefore the need to make serious and
thorough studies of it, but also the challenge of writing about
"digital" in a living history in the making (preventive medicine rather
than autopsy). A style to achieve. But I need to find a helper who is a
real writer probably 😊

And in any case my problem at the moment is to see a failure of
recovery, while I still think it retains its value. "Look for the mistake."

Thanks for the attention

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Le 28/01/2022 à 12:00, Gérard Calliet a écrit :
don't read
> 1) There is an actual crisis - at least as seen from France - and it is
> not a crisis.
but
1) There is an actual crisis - at least as seen from France -

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Le 28/01/2022 à 13:29, John Dallman a écrit :
> In article <j5i0m8Fs463U1@mid.individual.net>,
> gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr (Gérard Calliet) wrote:
>
>> I apologize for the probably pretentiousness of this presentation.
>> If it can be an excuse, I consider that the respect due to an
>> audience as learned and experienced as c.o.v. implies to entrust
>> them with complex things.
>
> Here we seem to have a difference in national etiquette. To Americans,
> and other English-speakers, especially engineers, a crisis is best
> explained in a few blunt words. Lengthy speeches remove the sense of
> urgency.
>
> However, I don't think the situation is as bad as you do.
I cannot say anything about the world wide - because VSI don't say
anything -. But in France the situation is a lot worse than what I say.
And we have had in France a lot of efforts made to keep the customers in
(port of python, use on vms of zabbix,... a heir of DECUS doing a lot of
things (100 attendees on meetings about VMS with VMSgenerations). And in
the same country I think I'm the only one who says VSI can succeed.
Others (customers and consultants)all say VMS will dye in 3 or 5 years.
The differences are only between angst and anger.
VSI have not
> made an elaborate plan to address all of the things you're worried about,
> but that is almost certainly because they've been concentrating on the
> issue of the x86 port.
My point. On my side I see that as the bad idea. I agree without x86 in
some future, nothing is possible. But because the time to x86 is long -
more long every year - it is important to cope with a very long
transition, and so the unique goal x86 cannot work. And even if we had
now x86, a port is always a big decision(remember the ports to alpha or
itannium), we have the problem of ISV.
The logic had to be we will port to x86 because VMS is good for us for
x, y, z questions, notably the confort that give us VSI we'll try a port
to x86. And not: because you will have x86 you have to be with VMS now,
even with sacrifices. It is this logic which doesn'nt work.
Without that working, they are sunk. Now they know
> it will work, they should be making the plans for distribution and
> marketing.
No. Marketing had to be and has to be made about VMS intrinsics. Same
idea.>
> Remember that we're viewing this process partly from the inside. It is
> not surprising that it does not look smooth; these things never do from
> within.
>
>> I come back to the "Digital is dead, long live DEC" reference. I
>> always have this reference in mind, following two ways of thinking:
>
> I'm afraid that to me it does not convey anything meaningful.
>
> I can, however, see a possible approach that would assist French
> customers and intermediaries. Let me explain:
>
> A transition to x86 is excellent for VMS end-users who are willing and
> able to move their applications to x86 swiftly. But not all of them are
> in that position.
>
> A transition to x86 means that some parts of intermediaries' expertise
> becomes far less useful: expertise on DEC and the older HP hardware will
> no longer be required by end-users who are no longer using old kit. The
> intermediaries need something else to sell.
>
> These two problems may have the same solution.
>
> I mentioned the idea of emulating Alpha and IPF yesterday. Emulating
> 64-bit VMS on VMS is rather easier than emulating it on a non-VMS
> operating system. The x86 VMS has, I think, all the system calls of Alpha
> and IPF versions, and thanks to the DEC calling standard, they're called
> in the same way.
>
> So reviving the free and open-source IPF emulator I posted a link to
> today, porting it to x86 VMS, and equipping it with a system call
> translation facility would seem to be a route to running IPF VMS
> applications on x86 VMS.
>
> That gives a transition route to running on x86 for IPF customers who
> can't or won't port their applications, and gives intermediaries
> something to provide expertise on. This will require a fair amount of
> open-source software development work, but that will benefit everyone
> involved, and probably prompt improvements to x86 VMS development tools.
You gave excellent technical ideas. I'll see that.

The point today is business success, gaining again trust from customers.
And they are not stupid: we have to answer objective things to their
abjective angsts.
>
> John

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 2022-01-27, Gérard Calliet <gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr> wrote:
> I will give the links about the dedicated center. It is Century21, I
> think. It is one of the company the chair man had. I saw the youtube
> presenting the operation: "everything is fine with virtualisation, bla,
> bla..." . Where are gone the strict operations of testing? I don't know.
> My problem is not about one fact, but about a conjunction of facts,
> which seems to be a trend. And yes, as for everything, hypothesis.
> Because we don't get any real information.

How is virtualisation incompatible with testing ?

If anything, it makes it easier to test certain types of things.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 2022-01-28, John Dallman <jgd@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I mentioned the idea of emulating Alpha and IPF yesterday. Emulating
> 64-bit VMS on VMS is rather easier than emulating it on a non-VMS
> operating system. The x86 VMS has, I think, all the system calls of Alpha
> and IPF versions, and thanks to the DEC calling standard, they're called
> in the same way.
>
> So reviving the free and open-source IPF emulator I posted a link to
> today, porting it to x86 VMS, and equipping it with a system call
> translation facility would seem to be a route to running IPF VMS
> applications on x86 VMS.
>

A system call translator might not be enough for VMS because, unlike Linux,
there are VMS applications that decide to directly look at data cells in
the process space instead of getting the data via system services.

There may be other issues due to the persistent process nature of VMS,
instead of the "create a process to run a single program and then discard
the process" nature of Linux. You wouldn't just be running a standalone
user application, but would also have to provide access to things like
DCL services via sys$cli() support.

> That gives a transition route to running on x86 for IPF customers who
> can't or won't port their applications, and gives intermediaries
> something to provide expertise on. This will require a fair amount of
> open-source software development work, but that will benefit everyone
> involved, and probably prompt improvements to x86 VMS development tools.
>

I've had a quick look at the emulator you posted elsewhere and it appears
to be another Ski. It's not the basis for a full system emulator but with
enough effort, you _may_ be able to replace the Linux system call stuff
with a VMS system services interface.

Whether that's enough for VMS applications in general is a very open
question. For example, in addition to the above issues, are there any
implications when using RMS in this setup ?

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 1/28/2022 7:58 AM, Gérard Calliet wrote:
> Le 28/01/2022 à 13:29, John Dallman a écrit :
>> In article <j5i0m8Fs463U1@mid.individual.net>,
>> gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr (Gérard Calliet) wrote:
>>
>>> I apologize for the probably pretentiousness of this presentation.
>>> If it can be an excuse, I consider that the respect due to an
>>> audience as learned and experienced as c.o.v. implies to entrust
>>> them with complex things.

Frankly, I fail to understand just what you're trying to say. Maybe use fewer
and smaller words?

>> Here we seem to have a difference in national etiquette. To Americans,
>> and other English-speakers, especially engineers, a crisis is best
>> explained in a few blunt words. Lengthy speeches remove the sense of
>> urgency.

Just what is your crisis? Try fewer words. Be specific.

>> However, I don't think the situation is as bad as you do.
> I cannot say anything about the world wide - because VSI don't say anything -.
> But in France the situation is a lot worse than what I say. And we have had in
> France a lot of efforts made to keep the customers in (port of python, use on
> vms of zabbix,... a heir of DECUS doing a lot of things (100 attendees on
> meetings about VMS with VMSgenerations). And in the same country I think I'm the
> only one who says VSI can succeed. Others (customers and consultants)all say VMS
> will dye in 3 or 5 years. The differences are only between angst and anger.
> VSI have not

If there is such an attitude, that VSI will fail, what are the facts behind such
an attitude?

VSI is rather far along the road to success.

>> made an elaborate plan to address all of the things you're worried about,
>> but that is almost certainly because they've been concentrating on the
>> issue of the x86 port.
> My point. On my side I see that as the bad idea.

The x86 port is the reason VSI exists. I'm not sure what else you want them to
do. Can you be specific?

> I agree without x86 in some
> future, nothing is possible. But because the time to x86 is long - more long
> every year - it is important to cope with a very long transition, and so the
> unique goal x86 cannot work. And even if we had now x86, a port is always a big
> decision(remember the ports to alpha or itannium),

Yes, I remember, and they happened rather easily. For many, it was compile,
link, and run. Well, yeah, moving data to the new system too, but that's not
really part of any port.

Now, if you don't have source code, better look for emulators, because you're
screwed.

> we have the problem of ISV.
> The logic had to be we will port to x86 because VMS is good for us for x, y, z
> questions, notably the confort that give us VSI we'll try a port to x86. And
> not: because you will have x86 you have to be with VMS now, even with
> sacrifices. It is this logic which doesn'nt work.

That made no sense to me ...

> Without that working, they are sunk. Now they know
>> it will work, they should be making the plans for distribution and
>> marketing.
> No. Marketing had to be and has to be made about VMS intrinsics. Same idea.>
>> Remember that we're viewing this process partly from the inside. It is
>> not surprising that it does not look smooth; these things never do from
>> within.
>>
>>> I come back to the "Digital is dead, long live DEC" reference. I
>>> always have this reference in mind, following two ways of thinking:
>>
>> I'm afraid that to me it does not convey anything meaningful.

Correct ...

>> I can, however, see a possible approach that would assist French
>> customers and intermediaries. Let me explain:
>>
>> A transition to x86 is excellent for VMS end-users who are willing and
>> able to move their applications to x86 swiftly. But not all of them are
>> in that position.

Why not?

>> A transition to x86 means that some parts of intermediaries' expertise
>> becomes far less useful: expertise on DEC and the older HP hardware will
>> no longer be required by end-users who are no longer using old kit. The
>> intermediaries need something else to sell.

That really is not a VMS problem. Perhaps a business problem.

>> These two problems may have the same solution.
>>
>> I mentioned the idea of emulating Alpha and IPF yesterday. Emulating
>> 64-bit VMS on VMS is rather easier than emulating it on a non-VMS
>> operating system. The x86 VMS has, I think, all the system calls of Alpha
>> and IPF versions, and thanks to the DEC calling standard, they're called
>> in the same way.
>>
>> So reviving the free and open-source IPF emulator I posted a link to
>> today, porting it to x86 VMS, and equipping it with a system call
>> translation facility would seem to be a route to running IPF VMS
>> applications on x86 VMS.
>>
>> That gives a transition route to running on x86 for IPF customers who
>> can't or won't port their applications, and gives intermediaries
>> something to provide expertise on. This will require a fair amount of
>> open-source software development work, but that will benefit everyone
>> involved, and probably prompt improvements to x86 VMS development tools.
> You gave excellent technical ideas. I'll see that.
>
> The point today is business success, gaining again trust from customers. And
> they are not stupid: we have to answer objective things to their abjective angsts.

The bottom line, for me, is "will VMS on x86 meet your needs". If so, then use
it. If not, then you will be looking elsewhere.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

Le 28/01/2022 à 22:32, Dave Froble a écrit :
> On 1/28/2022 7:58 AM, Gérard Calliet wrote:
>> Le 28/01/2022 à 13:29, John Dallman a écrit :
>>> In article <j5i0m8Fs463U1@mid.individual.net>,
>>> gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr (Gérard Calliet) wrote:
>>>
>>>> I apologize for the probably pretentiousness of this presentation.
>>>> If it can be an excuse, I consider that the respect due to an
>>>> audience as learned and experienced as c.o.v. implies to entrust
>>>> them with complex things.
>
> Frankly, I fail to understand just what you're trying to say.  Maybe use
> fewer and smaller words?
My problem is quite simple: why the majority of customers we know in
france don't think about a real future for VMS, and don't do efforts to
port to x86. And also why VSI seems to be totaly deaf.
>
>>> Here we seem to have a difference in national etiquette. To Americans,
>>> and other English-speakers, especially engineers, a crisis is best
>>> explained in a few blunt words. Lengthy speeches remove the sense of
>>> urgency.
>
> Just what is your crisis?  Try fewer words.  Be specific.
Same words: no more business with VMS in the few next years. The ones
who are not quitting now do that against their will, so we understand.
If we are not the exception, it seems there is a crisis.

VMS is more and more expensive, the subscription is totally badly received.

In france we have not any real information about the adoption of x86
elsewhere, not serious information of the business results of VSI. The
french pay to another entity (teracloud) their bills. For a lot of the
big customers it's a problem: to deal with a little company a little bit
unknowned.

Changes in the key management is worrying: changes of ceo, arriving of
persons from the investor's past, and not any word about what is the
signification on strategy: who is the pilot, where he really wants to go?

Alliance with sector7, and we heard from a VSI people about port of
customers to x86 "we'll [the service business unit of VSI] study your
case, if we can help you to go to x86 we'll help you, and otherwise
we'll find solutions". Consequence: do they themselves in VSI think x86
will succeed?

You can think french are wrong on all that bad signals. We have the
symitric cultural default: when we hear a beautifull simple story, we
suspect someones is making fun of us. Pathological pessimism.

And a dreadfull confession: even my french friends say my sentences are
too long and complicate. In french, as our big writer, Proust, it is
possible to do very long sentences, and sometimes the writer don't even
understands himself what he has writen. I'm not Proust, but I have this
default, and, worst, I use a automatic translator when I have no time (a
very good one, it uses IA). I reread quickly, and if I understand, I
send. Big apologies :(

Anyway, I understand I failed to explain my point. Perhaps one or two
things could be clear.

I'm totaly convinced VSI would succeed only if they are strongly
innovative, because the issue of VMS revival is everything but trivial.
And my analasys is that from 2014 to today they have been strongly non
innovative. So I try to understand why, and how help thinking better.

Example:
why HP killed VMS? Very simple: because not immediate profits, not good
with the standard analysis of big IT companies. It is not an error, it
is just a standard. And I remember that in 2013 everyone in c.o.v. was
just saying the same thing: no future for VMS, all the trends are
against a success. Again, good arguments.

Not mine in these years. I thought there was in VMS an exception which
could match with the emerging tendancy of sustainibility. I was right, no?

But the equation was: compatibility of the VMS exceptions with the
emerging tendancy.

And as everyone knows, the business paradigms for sustainability are a
very complex issue, just emerging (for guys who live near MIT, please
learn about that). How to make profits with solutions which have very
long lives (the contrary of the Schumpeter "destructive creation"
paradigm), which need an agenda with very long times (the contrary of
the grand majority of the markets). Possible but not trivial at all. To
cope with it in simple issues (doing green technology, for example) is
not simple.

But with VMS we have to make a match between something which has had
similarities with the sustainability but is not quite from the same
cultur. More difficult.

And VSI constructs a strategy as if VMS could be profitable in the same
paradigms that had killed it. Success is possible? No. I thought that in
2014.

Now in France VMS cannot be sustainable. Look for the error.

The idea is a little complex, but the sentences are shorter. I did my best.

Other example:

A question:

Is VMS a legacy system? Or being on x86 one of the normal modern and
attractive OS?

If you hear VSI people, one day legacy, one day like all others. Perhaps
they don't know, and perhaps they don't care - and perhaps as all of us
:), we don't care.

The question is what strategy to choose? And imagine that VMS could be
the opportunity to have a change in the concept of legacy, because it is
just in the middle of the road, and that it is this situation which can
have a great future. To succeed we need to know who we are.

As you see: shorter sentences, more sentences needed.

Just for fun, a little story.

I founded about ten years ago a professional association for VMS (we had
the final banquet a month ago: too members retired). Whith it we could
do some interesting business. It was not so simple, but we succeed.

I remember one of the member who explained to me how to do good
business, being understood by customers. The sentence is KISS: Keep It
Simple Stupid. I do say he made my day with that. I was wandering saying
that to Mr Turing, or Miss Ada Lovelace, or the Lady of the Navy who
contributed to Cobol and the Digital history. I'm not comparing me with
these geniuses.

Only saying innovation is very, very complex and subtil new differences
(between relaunch and legacy, for example) are very difficult to define
and expose. On the other hand it is very simple to not innovate, because
the totality of the old good certitudes are here to give us the tranquility.

Relaunch of VMS is innovative. The KISS method has been applied. Done.

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Le 28/01/2022 à 22:32, Dave Froble a écrit :
>
> Just what is your crisis?  Try fewer words.  Be specific.
Just a little remark and question.

Perhaps the french situation is totally specific because there is here
an important function in the ecosystem for intermediairy consultant or
reseller companies.

For them the VSI strategy, who takes every functions in the market, is
not at all suitable. And so could be understood part of the crisis - and
the french final customer depend on the intermediairies.

I have not any idea of how the business ecosystem elsewhere functions,
hox not french companies live subscritption, size of VSI,...

Perhaps french market is a total exception, and we'll retire, whishing
the best for others - french generosity :) -.

I'm not kiding: one simple issue is because we have not information we
are doing hypothesis, and only founded on locality.

Why VSI does not do more than storytelling? Bad tradition of secret from
the world company.

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 1/29/2022 5:17 PM, Gérard Calliet wrote:
> Le 28/01/2022 à 22:32, Dave Froble a écrit :
>> On 1/28/2022 7:58 AM, Gérard Calliet wrote:
>>> Le 28/01/2022 à 13:29, John Dallman a écrit :
>>>> In article <j5i0m8Fs463U1@mid.individual.net>,
>>>> gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr (Gérard Calliet) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I apologize for the probably pretentiousness of this presentation.
>>>>> If it can be an excuse, I consider that the respect due to an
>>>>> audience as learned and experienced as c.o.v. implies to entrust
>>>>> them with complex things.
>>
>> Frankly, I fail to understand just what you're trying to say. Maybe use fewer
>> and smaller words?
> My problem is quite simple: why the majority of customers we know in france
> don't think about a real future for VMS, and don't do efforts to port to x86.
> And also why VSI seems to be totaly deaf.
>>
>>>> Here we seem to have a difference in national etiquette. To Americans,
>>>> and other English-speakers, especially engineers, a crisis is best
>>>> explained in a few blunt words. Lengthy speeches remove the sense of
>>>> urgency.
>>
>> Just what is your crisis? Try fewer words. Be specific.
> Same words: no more business with VMS in the few next years. The ones who are
> not quitting now do that against their will, so we understand.
> If we are not the exception, it seems there is a crisis.
>
> VMS is more and more expensive, the subscription is totally badly received.
>
> In france we have not any real information about the adoption of x86 elsewhere,
> not serious information of the business results of VSI. The french pay to
> another entity (teracloud) their bills. For a lot of the big customers it's a
> problem: to deal with a little company a little bit unknowned.
>
> Changes in the key management is worrying: changes of ceo, arriving of persons
> from the investor's past, and not any word about what is the signification on
> strategy: who is the pilot, where he really wants to go?
>
> Alliance with sector7, and we heard from a VSI people about port of customers to
> x86 "we'll [the service business unit of VSI] study your case, if we can help
> you to go to x86 we'll help you, and otherwise we'll find solutions".
> Consequence: do they themselves in VSI think x86 will succeed?
>
> You can think french are wrong on all that bad signals. We have the symitric
> cultural default: when we hear a beautifull simple story, we suspect someones is
> making fun of us. Pathological pessimism.
>
> And a dreadfull confession: even my french friends say my sentences are too long
> and complicate. In french, as our big writer, Proust, it is possible to do very
> long sentences, and sometimes the writer don't even understands himself what he
> has writen. I'm not Proust, but I have this default, and, worst, I use a
> automatic translator when I have no time (a very good one, it uses IA). I reread
> quickly, and if I understand, I send. Big apologies :(
>
> Anyway, I understand I failed to explain my point. Perhaps one or two things
> could be clear.
>
> I'm totaly convinced VSI would succeed only if they are strongly innovative,
> because the issue of VMS revival is everything but trivial. And my analasys is
> that from 2014 to today they have been strongly non innovative. So I try to
> understand why, and how help thinking better.
>
> Example:
> why HP killed VMS? Very simple: because not immediate profits, not good with the
> standard analysis of big IT companies. It is not an error, it is just a
> standard. And I remember that in 2013 everyone in c.o.v. was just saying the
> same thing: no future for VMS, all the trends are against a success. Again, good
> arguments.
>
> Not mine in these years. I thought there was in VMS an exception which could
> match with the emerging tendancy of sustainibility. I was right, no?
>
> But the equation was: compatibility of the VMS exceptions with the emerging
> tendancy.
>
> And as everyone knows, the business paradigms for sustainability are a very
> complex issue, just emerging (for guys who live near MIT, please learn about
> that). How to make profits with solutions which have very long lives (the
> contrary of the Schumpeter "destructive creation" paradigm), which need an
> agenda with very long times (the contrary of the grand majority of the markets).
> Possible but not trivial at all. To cope with it in simple issues (doing green
> technology, for example) is not simple.
>
> But with VMS we have to make a match between something which has had
> similarities with the sustainability but is not quite from the same cultur. More
> difficult.
>
> And VSI constructs a strategy as if VMS could be profitable in the same
> paradigms that had killed it. Success is possible? No. I thought that in 2014.
>
> Now in France VMS cannot be sustainable. Look for the error.
>
> The idea is a little complex, but the sentences are shorter. I did my best.
>
> Other example:
>
> A question:
>
> Is VMS a legacy system? Or being on x86 one of the normal modern and attractive OS?
>
> If you hear VSI people, one day legacy, one day like all others. Perhaps they
> don't know, and perhaps they don't care - and perhaps as all of us :), we don't
> care.
>
> The question is what strategy to choose? And imagine that VMS could be the
> opportunity to have a change in the concept of legacy, because it is just in the
> middle of the road, and that it is this situation which can have a great future.
> To succeed we need to know who we are.
>
> As you see: shorter sentences, more sentences needed.
>
> Just for fun, a little story.
>
> I founded about ten years ago a professional association for VMS (we had the
> final banquet a month ago: too members retired). Whith it we could do some
> interesting business. It was not so simple, but we succeed.
>
> I remember one of the member who explained to me how to do good business, being
> understood by customers. The sentence is KISS: Keep It Simple Stupid. I do say
> he made my day with that. I was wandering saying that to Mr Turing, or Miss Ada
> Lovelace, or the Lady of the Navy who contributed to Cobol and the Digital
> history. I'm not comparing me with these geniuses.
>
> Only saying innovation is very, very complex and subtil new differences (between
> relaunch and legacy, for example) are very difficult to define and expose. On
> the other hand it is very simple to not innovate, because the totality of the
> old good certitudes are here to give us the tranquility.
>
> Relaunch of VMS is innovative. The KISS method has been applied. Done.
>

Ok, I'll try to keep this simple.

Start with, for the most part, humans are like lemmings. A bunch say "let's go
run off the cliff, and not wanting to think for themselves, and not wanting to
be left behind, another bunch joins in the "running off the cliff".

Now let's look at VMS and alternatives.

VMS is basically an OS developed by DEC to sell hardware. Back in the day that
hardware was quite expensive, and the profits must have been rather nice. Part
of that is that people took sides. I like IBM. I like DEC. I like HP. I like
Data General. And all the rest. So the result is that those liking VMS will
not be in the majority. Perhaps a decently large percentage, but less than 50%.
So, for the majority, if their preferred brand is no longer available, they
choose something else, and Unix and Linux are not tied to one of the old brands,
thus is something they can grab onto without "joining the enemy".

Then there is the thing called WEENDOZE. I've had former customers tell me "we
want to be a 100% windows shop". I ask why, and they do not have any reasons.
Did I perhaps mention lemmings?

So, let's consider VMS. If a user has an application that runs on VMS and is
meeting their needs, then VMS is most likely what they should choose to continue
to use. If they can. With the port to x86, such customers can do so, or, they
can become lemmings. Some will do one, some the other. If they choose
lemmings, there really isn't much one can do about that. They have made a
command decision, and surely don't want to hear what idiots they are. Calling
them idiots won't be helpful. But they have made a bad decision. It happens.
Get over it.

While the port to x86 is not complete, it is rather clear that VSI is being
successful, and will complete it. Note that they really don't have much time
for anything else, so if you ask for anything else, you will be disappointed.

The situation for ISVs is similar. They may have applications that are suitable
for some tasks. The key is whether customers believe those applications, on
VMS, are "right" for them. Some will have heard the call of the lemmings, and
most likely there is nothing you can do to convince them otherwise. Just wave
to them as they head for the cliff.

On 1/29/2022 5:40 PM, Gérard Calliet wrote:
> Le 28/01/2022 à 22:32, Dave Froble a écrit :
>>
>> Just what is your crisis? Try fewer words. Be specific.
> Just a little remark and question.
>
> Perhaps the french situation is totally specific because there is here an
> important function in the ecosystem for intermediairy consultant or reseller
> companies.
>
> For them the VSI strategy, who takes every functions in the market, is not at
> all suitable. And so could be understood part of the crisis - and the french
> final customer depend on the intermediairies.
>
> I have not any idea of how the business ecosystem elsewhere functions, hox not
> french companies live subscritption, size of VSI,...
>
> Perhaps french market is a total exception, and we'll retire, whishing the best
> for others - french generosity :) -.
>
> I'm not kiding: one simple issue is because we have not information we are doing
> hypothesis, and only founded on locality.
>
> Why VSI does not do more than storytelling? Bad tradition of secret from the
> world company.
>

If you're talking about users currently on VMS, then just tell them the truth.
One of those truths is that they can still use VMS. You can help those who will
believe you. There is nothing you can do about those who don't.

Perhaps I do not understand your business practices.

VSI is making VMS available into the future. There will be those who will take
advantage of that. There will be those who don't.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

Le 30/01/2022 à 02:01, Dave Froble a écrit :
> If you're talking about users currently on VMS, then just tell them the
> truth. One of those truths is that they can still use VMS.  You can help
> those who will believe you.  There is nothing you can do about those who
> don't.
Five years ago a lot of them believed me. About no one today.
>
> Perhaps I do not understand your business practices.
It is our customers who don't understand VSI practices. And our
customers have about the same practices than everyone.
>
> VSI is making VMS available into the future.  There will be those who
> will take advantage of that.  There will be those who don't.
If there will be VSI in the future. If they will have keep a sufficient
number of customers.

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Le 30/01/2022 à 01:56, Dave Froble a écrit :
> It's called a "self fulfilling prophesy", and it happens all the time.
You are totally right, and this thinking is just a part of the analysis
I have done before writting my pensum.

I am sure this self fulfilling prophety operates now in my neighborhood.
More than that when I fought in 2013 against the end of VMS, I did have
this analysis all days. My problem today is VSI acts a way that makes my
neeighborood a bench of prophets. Everything I can say, they sing to me
this french song "Tout va très bien madame la marquise". I cannot
convince them if I don't try a (positive) critic of the way VSI acts.

I read a lot of interesting things in this thread. No time this day to
answer on all. I'll do it. Perhaps the only goal was to do something and
not being alone. Done. A lot of thanks.

The song, a thank you gift:

Everything is really ok, Madam the marquise

Hello, hello James !
What's been going on?
Gone since 15 days,
on the end of the line
I'm calling you :
What will I found when i'll be back ?
Everything is really ok, Madam the marquise

Everything is really ok, everything is really ok
But we must, we must tell you
We deplore a really little thing, one stupidity,
the death of your grey mare horse,
But otherwise, Madam the marquise
Everything is really ok, everything is really ok.

Hello, hello Martin !
What's been going on?
My grey mare horse, dead, today !
Explain to me
Faithfull coachman,
How did it happen ?
This is nothing, Madam the marquise,
This is nothing, everything is really ok.
But we must, we must tell you,
We deplore a really little thing,
It died
In the fire
That destructed your stables.
But otherwise, Madam the marquise

Everything is really ok, everything is really ok.
Hello, hello Pascal !
What's been going on?
So my stables burned ?
Explain to me
My perfect cook,
How did it happen ?
This is nothing, Madam the marquise,
This is nothing, everything is really ok.
But we must, we must tell you,
We deplore a really little thing,
If the stables burned
It's because the castle was burning.
But otherwise, Madam the marquise
Everything is really ok, everything is really ok.

Hello, hello Lucas !
What's been going on?
So the castle is destructed ?
Explain to me
'Cause I staggered,
How did it happen ?
So, Madam the Marquise,
Learning he was ruined,
Just recovering from the surprise
the Marquis committed suicide
And coming a cropper
He toppled the candles,
putting fire to all the castle,
Which burned from the bottom up
Wind blowing on the fire
throwed it on the stables
And it's how
In one minute
We saw your grey mare horse dying !

But otherwise, Madam the marquise
Everything is really ok, everything is really ok.

Source:
https://muzikum.eu/en/ray-ventura/tout-va-tres-bien-madame-la-marquise-lyrics-english-translation

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Le 30/01/2022 à 01:56, Dave Froble a écrit :
> On 1/29/2022 5:17 PM, Gérard Calliet wrote:
>> Le 28/01/2022 à 22:32, Dave Froble a écrit :
>>> On 1/28/2022 7:58 AM, Gérard Calliet wrote:
>>>> Le 28/01/2022 à 13:29, John Dallman a écrit :
>>>>> In article <j5i0m8Fs463U1@mid.individual.net>,
>>>>> gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr (Gérard Calliet) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I apologize for the probably pretentiousness of this presentation.
>>>>>> If it can be an excuse, I consider that the respect due to an
>>>>>> audience as learned and experienced as c.o.v. implies to entrust
>>>>>> them with complex things.
>>>
>>> Frankly, I fail to understand just what you're trying to say.  Maybe
>>> use fewer
>>> and smaller words?
>> My problem is quite simple: why the majority of customers we know in
>> france
>> don't think about a real future for VMS, and don't do efforts to port
>> to x86.
>> And also why VSI seems to be totaly deaf.
>>>
>>>>> Here we seem to have a difference in national etiquette. To Americans,
>>>>> and other English-speakers, especially engineers, a crisis is best
>>>>> explained in a few blunt words. Lengthy speeches remove the sense of
>>>>> urgency.
>>>
>>> Just what is your crisis?  Try fewer words.  Be specific.
>> Same words: no more business with VMS in the few next years. The ones
>> who are
>> not quitting now do that against their will, so we understand.
>> If we are not the exception, it seems there is a crisis.
>>
>> VMS is more and more expensive, the subscription is totally badly
>> received.
>>
>> In france we have not any real information about the adoption of x86
>> elsewhere,
>> not serious information of the business results of VSI. The french pay to
>> another entity (teracloud) their bills. For a lot of the big customers
>> it's a
>> problem: to deal with a little company a little bit unknowned.
>>
>> Changes in the key management is worrying: changes of ceo, arriving of
>> persons
>> from the investor's past, and not any word about what is the
>> signification on
>> strategy: who is the pilot, where he really wants to go?
>>
>> Alliance with sector7, and we heard from a VSI people about port of
>> customers to
>> x86 "we'll [the service business unit of VSI] study your case, if we
>> can help
>> you to go to x86 we'll help you, and otherwise we'll find solutions".
>> Consequence: do they themselves in VSI think x86 will succeed?
>>
>> You can think french are wrong on all that bad signals. We have the
>> symitric
>> cultural default: when we hear a beautifull simple story, we suspect
>> someones is
>> making fun of us. Pathological pessimism.
>>
>> And a dreadfull confession: even my french friends say my sentences
>> are too long
>> and complicate. In french, as our big writer, Proust, it is possible
>> to do very
>> long sentences, and sometimes the writer don't even understands
>> himself what he
>> has writen. I'm not Proust, but I have this default, and, worst, I use a
>> automatic translator when I have no time (a very good one, it uses
>> IA). I reread
>> quickly, and if I understand, I send. Big apologies :(
>>
>> Anyway, I understand I failed to explain my point. Perhaps one or two
>> things
>> could be clear.
>>
>> I'm totaly convinced VSI would succeed only if they are strongly
>> innovative,
>> because the issue of VMS revival is everything but trivial. And my
>> analasys is
>> that from 2014 to today they have been strongly non innovative. So I
>> try to
>> understand why, and how help thinking better.
>>
>> Example:
>> why HP killed VMS? Very simple: because not immediate profits, not
>> good with the
>> standard analysis of big IT companies. It is not an error, it is just a
>> standard. And I remember that in 2013 everyone in c.o.v. was just
>> saying the
>> same thing: no future for VMS, all the trends are against a success.
>> Again, good
>> arguments.
>>
>> Not mine in these years. I thought there was in VMS an exception which
>> could
>> match with the emerging tendancy of sustainibility. I was right, no?
>>
>> But the equation was: compatibility of the VMS exceptions with the
>> emerging
>> tendancy.
>>
>> And as everyone knows, the business paradigms for sustainability are a
>> very
>> complex issue, just emerging (for guys who live near MIT, please learn
>> about
>> that). How to make profits with solutions which have very long lives (the
>> contrary of the Schumpeter "destructive creation" paradigm), which
>> need an
>> agenda with very long times (the contrary of the grand majority of the
>> markets).
>> Possible but not trivial at all. To cope with it in simple issues
>> (doing green
>> technology, for example) is not simple.
>>
>> But with VMS we have to make a match between something which has had
>> similarities with the sustainability but is not quite from the same
>> cultur. More
>> difficult.
>>
>> And VSI constructs a strategy as if VMS could be profitable in the same
>> paradigms that had killed it. Success is possible? No. I thought that
>> in 2014.
>>
>> Now in France VMS cannot be sustainable. Look for the error.
>>
>> The idea is a little complex, but the sentences are shorter. I did my
>> best.
>>
>> Other example:
>>
>> A question:
>>
>> Is VMS a legacy system? Or being on x86 one of the normal modern and
>> attractive OS?
>>
>> If you hear VSI people, one day legacy, one day like all others.
>> Perhaps they
>> don't know, and perhaps they don't care - and perhaps as all of us :),
>> we don't
>> care.
>>
>> The question is what strategy to choose? And imagine that VMS could be
>> the
>> opportunity to have a change in the concept of legacy, because it is
>> just in the
>> middle of the road, and that it is this situation which can have a
>> great future.
>> To succeed we need to know who we are.
>>
>> As you see: shorter sentences, more sentences needed.
>>
>> Just for fun, a little story.
>>
>> I founded about ten years ago a professional association for VMS (we
>> had the
>> final banquet a month ago: too members retired). Whith it we could do
>> some
>> interesting business. It was not so simple, but we succeed.
>>
>> I remember one of the member who explained to me how to do good
>> business, being
>> understood by customers. The sentence is KISS: Keep It Simple Stupid.
>> I do say
>> he made my day with that. I was wandering saying that to Mr Turing, or
>> Miss Ada
>> Lovelace, or the Lady of the Navy who contributed to Cobol and the
>> Digital
>> history. I'm not comparing me with these geniuses.
>>
>> Only saying innovation is very, very complex and subtil new
>> differences (between
>> relaunch and legacy, for example) are very difficult to define and
>> expose. On
>> the other hand it is very simple to not innovate, because the totality
>> of the
>> old good certitudes are here to give us the tranquility.
>>
>> Relaunch of VMS is innovative. The KISS method has been applied. Done.
>>
>
> Ok, I'll try to keep this simple.
>
> Start with, for the most part, humans are like lemmings.  A bunch say
> "let's go run off the cliff, and not wanting to think for themselves,
> and not wanting to be left behind, another bunch joins in the "running
> off the cliff".
>
> Now let's look at VMS and alternatives.
>
> VMS is basically an OS developed by DEC to sell hardware.  Back in the
> day that hardware was quite expensive, and the profits must have been
> rather nice.  Part of that is that people took sides.  I like IBM.  I
> like DEC.  I like HP.  I like Data General.  And all the rest.  So the
> result is that those liking VMS will not be in the majority.  Perhaps a
> decently large percentage, but less than 50%.  So, for the majority, if
> their preferred brand is no longer available, they choose something
> else, and Unix and Linux are not tied to one of the old brands, thus is
> something they can grab onto without "joining the enemy".
>
> Then there is the thing called WEENDOZE.  I've had former customers tell
> me "we want to be a 100% windows shop".  I ask why, and they do not have
> any reasons. Did I perhaps mention lemmings?
>
> So, let's consider VMS.  If a user has an application that runs on VMS
> and is meeting their needs, then VMS is most likely what they should
> choose to continue to use.  If they can.  With the port to x86, such
> customers can do so, or, they can become lemmings.  Some will do one,
> some the other.  If they choose lemmings, there really isn't much one
> can do about that.  They have made a command decision, and surely don't
> want to hear what idiots they are.  Calling them idiots won't be
> helpful.  But they have made a bad decision.  It happens. Get over it.
>
> While the port to x86 is not complete, it is rather clear that VSI is
> being successful, and will complete it.  Note that they really don't
> have much time for anything else, so if you ask for anything else, you
> will be disappointed.
>
> The situation for ISVs is similar.  They may have applications that are
> suitable for some tasks.  The key is whether customers believe those
> applications, on VMS, are "right" for them.  Some will have heard the
> call of the lemmings, and most likely there is nothing you can do to
> convince them otherwise.  Just wave to them as they head for the cliff.
>
> VSI's current customer base is those still on VMS, for whatever reason.
> Some will continue, as long as VMS is available.  Some will hear the
> call of the lemmings "it's gonna die, run while you can".  It's called a
> "self fulfilling prophesy", and it happens all the time.  Companies blow
> millions of dollars and go out of business all the time.  That will
> continue to happen.
>
> Remember the line in the song, "a man hears what he wants to hear and
> disregards the rest".  If someone is not listening to you, move on to
> those who might. That is about all you can do.
>
I reread all the thread. There are a lot of interesting things. Our
readers will do they honey.

On 2022-01-28 11:00:25 +0000, Gérard Calliet said:

> Le 27/01/2022 à 22:20, John Dallman a écrit :
>> If you could express yourselves much more concisely, you might get
>> better results.
> You are absolutely right. This has always been my problem.

Prolix is, and it detracts.

The following two points seem the crux:

> 3) x86 is necessary, but making it the top priority has been a mistake

There are always trade-offs.

Folks still on HPE versions aren't buying, or aren't buying yet.

They aren't buying support, and aren't buying upgrades and that for
whatever local reasons, and are interested in per-call and fix-my-app
fixes at most.

Not buying means no revenues.

More than a few sites do need dedicated staff for updates and overhauls
and app refactoring for their existing production, but that maintenance
and upkeep costs money and time and focus.

VSI seemingly has no rights to patch older HPE versions.

Which for those sites means providing workarounds for app problems on
those other and older versions at best, maybe some add-on back-porting
performance-permitting, and making suggestions for upgrades.

Which is what you (Gérard) and others are already doing.

VSI seemingly already lacks a staff large enough for the existing
x86-64 port; for what work they already have on their roadmap.

Diluting VSI focus (further) to provide development outsourcing and app
services for older versions—and whatever else you're suggesting in that
wall of text you've posted—risks delaying the x86-64 port.

Which will detract from the revenues VSI sees available from those
sites wanting or needing to keep current hardware and software.

> 4) VSI is creating a desert around it: no marketing, no community
> encouragement, discouragement of intermediaries; the ecosystem is
> heading for implosion

So what are your plans for the production environments and apps and
sites you're working with, should that implosion arise?

Nobody but you and yours are going to respond and adapt to your needs,
after all.

Whether that site-specific response might be continued delays and
deferrals and denials, or updating to VSI versions, or incrementally
porting apps off of OpenVMS, maybe making the case for you and yours to
be acquired by VSI, or otherwise?

> Thanks for the attention

VSI has what they think is a path to sustained revenue with their
available staff and budget, and bespoke and app-specific services for
long-retired OpenVMS and VAX/VMS production environments doesn't seem
to be a big part of that. (yet?)

Where VSI is with the staff and the budget they have—which is a
~twentieth of what I would want—they're mostly making what seem the
appropriate trade-offs for themselves, including SaaS licensing and the
rest. Whether their OpenVMS customers (us) agree?

--
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC

On 2022-02-01, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
> On 2022-01-28 11:00:25 +0000, Gérard Calliet said:
>
>> Le 27/01/2022 à 22:20, John Dallman a écrit :
>>> If you could express yourselves much more concisely, you might get
>>> better results.
>> You are absolutely right. This has always been my problem.
>
> Prolix is, and it detracts.
>

Gerard, if you want people to read what you post, you need to cut down
the size of what you currently post to about 40% of that size maximum.

>
>> Thanks for the attention
>
> VSI has what they think is a path to sustained revenue with their
> available staff and budget, and bespoke and app-specific services for
> long-retired OpenVMS and VAX/VMS production environments doesn't seem
> to be a big part of that. (yet?)
>

Short-term or long-term sustained revenue ?

How many people have refused to go with VSI as a direct result of
the time-limited production licences imposed by VSI without VSI
apparently being willing to make plans for what happens if VSI goes bust ?

Those time-limited production licences get VSI a guaranteed short-term
revenue stream. What are they doing to VSI's long-term revenue stream ?

How many companies would willingly tie the future of their systems
(and maybe even their company) so closely to the future of VSI ?

If VSI wants to make more people comfortable with time-limited
production licences, it needs to have a legally guaranteed plan
in place for if VSI goes bust. I am at a loss to understand why
VSI have apparently not addressed this as a matter of urgency.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

Le 01/02/2022 à 18:23, Stephen Hoffman a écrit :
> On 2022-01-28 11:00:25 +0000, Gérard Calliet said:
>
>> Le 27/01/2022 à 22:20, John Dallman a écrit :
>>> If you could express yourselves much more concisely, you might get
>>> better results.
>> You are absolutely right. This has always been my problem.
>
> Prolix is, and it detracts.
I must say, it is difficult of understand because it is not enought
prolix. You have facts, interpretations, reasons, motives.

Difficult to expose all. But necessary if you expect the ones you are
criticizing have their reasons, and you try to understand and not to
condamn. The french customers I know just condam. I was hoping thinking
could do better.

It is always a pain trying to think and expose it if the reader takes
only the facts, and is always totally confindent on his interpretations,
reasons, motives.

Perhaps I have cultural difficulties regarding brainstorming, and the
pure sense of thinktank is simpler than that I expect.
>
> The following two points seem the crux:
>
>> 3) x86 is necessary, but making it the top priority has been a mistake
>
> There are always trade-offs.
oh yeah?
>
> Folks still on HPE versions aren't buying, or aren't buying yet.
>
> They aren't buying support, and aren't buying upgrades and that for
> whatever local reasons, and are interested in per-call and fix-my-app
> fixes at most.
>
> Not buying means no revenues.
>
> More than a few sites do need dedicated staff for updates and overhauls
> and app refactoring for their existing production, but that maintenance
> and upkeep costs money and time and focus.
>
> VSI seemingly has no rights to patch older HPE versions.
They say. And if it is the case, no idea from VSI to renegociate it.
What about taking the fees for the transfered HPE support, and not
thinking about being a little more cooperative?
>
> Which for those sites means providing workarounds for app problems on
> those other and older versions at best, maybe some add-on back-porting
> performance-permitting, and making suggestions for upgrades.
>
> Which is what you (Gérard) and others are already doing.
We'll do lesser and lesser if everyones thinks VMS is dead. Ok, they are
wrong, or perhaps not anyone can say if VMS will survive.

What I try to say is that VSI creates by his way of acting the certitude
that VMS will dye.
It is a false belief, an effect of an unundurstandable strategy.
There is another false belief that says "they have their reasons, poor
guys, they do just what they can, and we have to accept everything".
I try to explain why these two beliefs are false, and why they exist. A
little bit complex.

But we can go on just on the facts. Pry. And lament if we dye.
>
> VSI seemingly already lacks a staff large enough for the existing x86-64
> port; for what work they already have on their roadmap.
>
> Diluting VSI focus (further) to provide development outsourcing and app
> services for older versions—and whatever else you're suggesting in that
> wall of text you've posted—risks delaying the x86-64 portI'm not sure they would be a lot of ressources to open the door at
operations of collaboration with customers or consultants keeping alive
the old things.

What you say I do could be a little bit helped (for example helping
someone who had port python, not being his concurrent), with some fees
to VSI to deliver expertise. The old guys would be gratefull and would
think about going ahead. On the contrary not any help and just force the
pace to the old guys. They condamn.
>
> Which will detract from the revenues VSI sees available from those sites
> wanting or needing to keep current hardware and software.
>
>> 4) VSI is creating a desert around it: no marketing, no community
>> encouragement, discouragement of intermediaries; the ecosystem is
>> heading for implosion
>
> So what are your plans for the production environments and apps and
> sites you're working with, should that implosion arise?
Doing for the Alpha and Itanium environments what I do for the VAX
environments. But VMS will be as died as museum OSes.
>
> Nobody but you and yours are going to respond and adapt to your needs,
> after all.
THE theory, yours. The rawest thing than can be said about an IT
ecosystem. Are you aware of how the IT ecosystems are successfull?
Because they understand the complex dependencies between suppliers,
users, experts, the dependencies between event and beliefs...
We depend on VSI and VSI depends on us. And as I think, normally, for
sure the customers has a little bit to adapt to the supplier, but the
rule is more that the supplier has to adapt to the needs of the customer.
I know, I know, Digital culture.
>
> Whether that site-specific response might be continued delays and
> deferrals and denials, or updating to VSI versions, or incrementally
> porting apps off of OpenVMS, maybe making the case for you and yours to
> be acquired by VSI, or otherwise?
Good intuition. VSI acts as a corsair, and his logic seems to be: if we
get all the market we'll survive. And yes, in 2 or 3 years VSI will be
in the best place, associated with sector7, to port off VMS, and "buy"
the independent consultants. A forecast I had in 2014. Yes, in that
time, just a forecast. Today the realty.

I do prefer thinking another strategy could preserve the future of VMS,
and mine. Motive. Better to be alive with VMS alive than to be dead and
VMS dead. Absurd, is'nt it?
>
>> Thanks for the attention
>
> VSI has what they think is a path to sustained revenue with their
> available staff and budget, and bespoke and app-specific services for
> long-retired OpenVMS and VAX/VMS production environments doesn't seem to
> be a big part of that. (yet?)
What do you think about a guy who will not sell to his customer what he
needs today to prepare him to buy a product which does'nt yet exist.
"You will not get the bread, I prepare for you the dessert!" Not my baker.
But perhaps, as you say, your baker has his reasons, we have just to
file at the baker's door, like they did in the old good times in russia
(russian are good believers).
>
> Where VSI is with the staff and the budget they have—which is a
> ~twentieth of what I would want—they're mostly making what seem the
> appropriate trade-offs for themselves, including SaaS licensing and the
> rest. Whether their OpenVMS customers (us) agree?
>
>
>
>

--
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 2022-02-01, Gérard Calliet <gerard.calliet@pia-sofer.fr> wrote:
> Le 01/02/2022 à 18:23, Stephen Hoffman a écrit :
>>
>> VSI has what they think is a path to sustained revenue with their
>> available staff and budget, and bespoke and app-specific services for
>> long-retired OpenVMS and VAX/VMS production environments doesn't seem to
>> be a big part of that. (yet?)
> What do you think about a guy who will not sell to his customer what he
> needs today to prepare him to buy a product which does'nt yet exist.
> "You will not get the bread, I prepare for you the dessert!" Not my baker.
> But perhaps, as you say, your baker has his reasons, we have just to
> file at the baker's door, like they did in the old good times in russia
> (russian are good believers).

It's this kind of pompous waffly stuff that stops people from reading
what you say Gerard.

You have important things to say based on your experience. Say those
things in a direct and to the point manner if you want people to read them.

Simon. (In Yorkshire-style feedback mode. :-))

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 2/1/2022 1:44 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-02-01, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2022-01-28 11:00:25 +0000, Gérard Calliet said:
>>
>>> Le 27/01/2022 à 22:20, John Dallman a écrit :
>>>> If you could express yourselves much more concisely, you might get
>>>> better results.
>>> You are absolutely right. This has always been my problem.
>>
>> Prolix is, and it detracts.
>>
>
> Gerard, if you want people to read what you post, you need to cut down
> the size of what you currently post to about 40% of that size maximum.
>
>>
>>> Thanks for the attention
>>
>> VSI has what they think is a path to sustained revenue with their
>> available staff and budget, and bespoke and app-specific services for
>> long-retired OpenVMS and VAX/VMS production environments doesn't seem
>> to be a big part of that. (yet?)
>>
>
> Short-term or long-term sustained revenue ?

If there is no short term revenue, then there will not be any long term revenue.

Planting crops for next year isn't much help, if you're starving today. Yes,
both are important.

> How many people have refused to go with VSI as a direct result of
> the time-limited production licences imposed by VSI without VSI
> apparently being willing to make plans for what happens if VSI goes bust ?

I think people are making more of this than it deserves.

1) If VSI doesn't fail, then there is no problem.
2) If a customer just cannot accept it now, then they negotiate.

> Those time-limited production licences get VSI a guaranteed short-term
> revenue stream. What are they doing to VSI's long-term revenue stream ?
>
> How many companies would willingly tie the future of their systems
> (and maybe even their company) so closely to the future of VSI ?

As I mentioned, negotiate what is acceptable. Got to figure if a hundred
customers said "we will sign up with VSI, but, only if we have some acceptable
plan to avoid a sudden loss of usage", what do you think VSI is going to do?
Perhaps say "we don't need your money"? Don't bet on that. If it goes that
way, then VSI will surely fail. Most people don't believe in suicide.

> If VSI wants to make more people comfortable with time-limited
> production licences, it needs to have a legally guaranteed plan
> in place for if VSI goes bust. I am at a loss to understand why
> VSI have apparently not addressed this as a matter of urgency.

They are wanting to succeed, not go bust. But if customers pressure them, they
will negotiate something acceptable. If customers don't care, then what's the
problem?

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486