On 2022-02-16, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
> On 2022-02-16, John Dallman <jgd@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>> HPE seem to have started to produce something for HP-UX. They announced
>> in 2017 that they would provide a way to run HP-UX in containers on x86
>> Linux, which obviously requires some kind of emulation. They called this
>> "Portable HP-UX", sometimes abbreviated "P-UX".
>>
>><https://3000newswire.blogs.com/3000_newswire/2017/09/hpe-takes-on-water-a
>> fter-its-software-flip.html>
>>
>> This is a beta for it:
>>
>> https://downloads.linux.hpe.com/SDR/project/c-ux-beta/
>>
>> The Administration Guide has the most information. However, it is dated
>> 2019, so it looks as if the project has died.
>>
>
> Interesting. That certainly looks like an Itanium full system emulator.
>
> It's a pity that it's HP-UX specific. I also note it's not available
> for download without a warranty/support contract unfortunately.
>

I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.

It looks more most of the HP-UX stuff is capturing the original system
configuration and moving the HP-UX installation over to the emulator
and as such is basically a layer on top of the full system emulator.

Could VSI provide their own VMS layer on top of the emulator to move
an Itanium system over to the emulator ?

While the documentation is explicit that "The emulation is tuned for
HP-UX 11i v3. This OS is the only guest OS supported by the P-UX virtual
machine.", I wonder how much additional work would be required to get
it to support VMS ?

Given that VSI are in partnership with HPE, perhaps VSI could get
access to the source code to find out how viable that could be ?

Can someone else offer their own opinion ?

Simon.

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

On 2/17/22 09:00, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-02-16, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
>> On 2022-02-16, John Dallman <jgd@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>>> HPE seem to have started to produce something for HP-UX. They announced
>>> in 2017 that they would provide a way to run HP-UX in containers on x86
>>> Linux, which obviously requires some kind of emulation. They called this
>>> "Portable HP-UX", sometimes abbreviated "P-UX".
>>>
>>> <https://3000newswire.blogs.com/3000_newswire/2017/09/hpe-takes-on-water-a
>>> fter-its-software-flip.html>
>>>
>>> This is a beta for it:
>>>
>>> https://downloads.linux.hpe.com/SDR/project/c-ux-beta/
>>>
>>> The Administration Guide has the most information. However, it is dated
>>> 2019, so it looks as if the project has died.
>>>
>>
>> Interesting. That certainly looks like an Itanium full system emulator.
>>
>> It's a pity that it's HP-UX specific. I also note it's not available
>> for download without a warranty/support contract unfortunately.
>>
>
> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
>
> It looks more most of the HP-UX stuff is capturing the original system
> configuration and moving the HP-UX installation over to the emulator
> and as such is basically a layer on top of the full system emulator.
>
> Could VSI provide their own VMS layer on top of the emulator to move
> an Itanium system over to the emulator ?
>
> While the documentation is explicit that "The emulation is tuned for
> HP-UX 11i v3. This OS is the only guest OS supported by the P-UX virtual
> machine.", I wonder how much additional work would be required to get
> it to support VMS ?
>
> Given that VSI are in partnership with HPE, perhaps VSI could get
> access to the source code to find out how viable that could be ?
>
> Can someone else offer their own opinion ?

Opinion? Why is that every time I see this my mind makes it say PHUX?
:-)

bill

On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:

> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.

My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"

The itanic was never a good idea. Yeah, throw enough memory and process shrinks
at something and it will work. Doesn't make it a good idea.

--
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

On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
>
> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
>
> The itanic was never a good idea.  Yeah, throw enough memory and process
> shrinks at something and it will work.  Doesn't make it a good idea.

VMS users should go for x86-64.

I can understand the interest from HP-UX userrs.

Arne

On 2022-02-17, John Dallman <jgd@cix.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <sulkdg$6eu$1@dont-email.me>,
> clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley) wrote:
>
>> Given that VSI are in partnership with HPE, perhaps VSI could get
>> access to the source code to find out how viable that could be ?
>>
>> Can someone else offer their own opinion ?
>
> I think you're being quite optimistic here. Portable HP-UX is not in
> evidence nowadays, so it was presumably postponed, cancelled or renamed.
>

Around here, I am not used to being called "quite optimistic". :-)

> I've done a little digging into the virtualisation offerings for
> Integrity machines, and could not find anything that looked like a
> descendent, so it doesn't seem to have been renamed AFAICS.
>
> Postponement is possible, but the logical time to restart the beta would
> have been when Itanium shipments ended in 2021. That does not seem to
> have happened.
>
> So it would appear to have been cancelled.
>

The reasons could be business/management related instead of technical.

Given that VSI has absolutely no solution for emulating Itanium
systems on other architectures, it might be worth a look by them
if it helps keep a few customers until x86-64 VMS is finally ready
and has been in production long enough to be trusted generally.

Forcing customers to go back from Itanium to Alpha so they can run
as emulated systems on modern hardware is not a good situation for
VSI to be placing potential customers in, given what those potential
customers might end up doing instead if they are placed in that position.

Simon.

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

On 2022-02-17, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
>>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
>>
>> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
>>
>> The itanic was never a good idea.  Yeah, throw enough memory and process
>> shrinks at something and it will work.  Doesn't make it a good idea.
>
> VMS users should go for x86-64.
>

When a production quality version is _finally_ available and when it's
been around long enough to be trusted.

If VSI can deliver a production quality Itanium emulation product a lot
quicker than that, and hence allows customers to move from their Itanium
hardware to modern hardware, that could be enough to keep some customers
that VSI would otherwise lose.

Simon.

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

On 2/17/2022 2:11 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> Given that VSI has absolutely no solution for emulating Itanium
> systems on other architectures, it might be worth a look by them
> if it helps keep a few customers until x86-64 VMS is finally ready
> and has been in production long enough to be trusted generally.
>
> Forcing customers to go back from Itanium to Alpha so they can run
> as emulated systems on modern hardware is not a good situation for
> VSI to be placing potential customers in, given what those potential
> customers might end up doing instead if they are placed in that position.

I would expect the current VMS HW supplier (that is IslandCo
not HP !!!!) to be able to deliver Itanium systems until 9.2
hits the streets and are tested.

Arne

On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 2:17:36 PM UTC-5, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-02-17, Arne Vajhøj <ar...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> > On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> >> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> >>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
> >>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
> >>
> >> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
> >>
> >> The itanic was never a good idea. Yeah, throw enough memory and process
> >> shrinks at something and it will work. Doesn't make it a good idea.
> >
> > VMS users should go for x86-64.
> >
> When a production quality version is _finally_ available and when it's
> been around long enough to be trusted.
>
> If VSI can deliver a production quality Itanium emulation product a lot
> quicker than that, and hence allows customers to move from their Itanium
> hardware to modern hardware, that could be enough to keep some customers
> that VSI would otherwise lose.
> Simon.
>
> --
> Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
> Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

Given the general overhead of any emulation product, I don't see any emulation effort viable for Itanium. The speeds of the Itanium hardware is such that any potential emulator would not be able to provide comparable performance levels. With the X86 port not too far out, I would believe that the x86 target is a better option. I expect that the existing Itanium hardware will last until then.

Dan

On 2/17/22 14:17, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-02-17, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
>>>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
>>>
>>> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
>>>
>>> The itanic was never a good idea.  Yeah, throw enough memory and process
>>> shrinks at something and it will work.  Doesn't make it a good idea.
>>
>> VMS users should go for x86-64.
>>
>
> When a production quality version is _finally_ available and when it's
> been around long enough to be trusted.
>
> If VSI can deliver a production quality Itanium emulation product a lot
> quicker than that, and hence allows customers to move from their Itanium
> hardware to modern hardware, that could be enough to keep some customers
> that VSI would otherwise lose.

And any time on such a project would just be wasted time that
could have been spent on projects that matter. Like the
Titanic it was name for it has sunk. Let it rest on the
bottom and move on.

bill

On 2/17/22 14:08, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
>>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
>>
>> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
>>
>> The itanic was never a good idea.  Yeah, throw enough memory and
>> process shrinks at something and it will work.  Doesn't make it a good
>> idea.
>
> VMS users should go for x86-64.
>
> I can understand the interest from HP-UX userrs.
>

I can't understand the interest in HP-UX at all. It's just
another proprietary Unix and not really one of the better ones.
And, yes, I have had to work with it at higher than the user
level.

bill

On 2022-02-17, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> On 2/17/2022 2:11 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> Given that VSI has absolutely no solution for emulating Itanium
>> systems on other architectures, it might be worth a look by them
>> if it helps keep a few customers until x86-64 VMS is finally ready
>> and has been in production long enough to be trusted generally.
>>
>> Forcing customers to go back from Itanium to Alpha so they can run
>> as emulated systems on modern hardware is not a good situation for
>> VSI to be placing potential customers in, given what those potential
>> customers might end up doing instead if they are placed in that position.
>
> I would expect the current VMS HW supplier (that is IslandCo
> not HP !!!!) to be able to deliver Itanium systems until 9.2
> hits the streets and are tested.
>

Can you virtualize the hardware that David provides ?

I'm thinking about the push towards server consolidation on standard
hardware that is always ongoing.

Simon.

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

On 2/17/2022 2:28 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 2/17/22 14:08, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
>>>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
>>>
>>> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
>>>
>>> The itanic was never a good idea.  Yeah, throw enough memory and
>>> process shrinks at something and it will work.  Doesn't make it a
>>> good idea.
>>
>> VMS users should go for x86-64.
>>
>> I can understand the interest from HP-UX userrs.
>
> I can't understand the interest in HP-UX at all.  It's just
> another proprietary Unix and not really one of the better ones.
> And, yes, I have had to work with it at higher than the user
> level.

There are places where they run HP-UX.

They have a problem with HW.

They can migrate from HP-UX to Linux or try to stay on HP-UX for
some more years.

Staying means either IslandCo or an emulator when new system is needed.

Most will probably start migration to Linux. But some may be
interested in emulation.

We know that VAX emulation is used by some VMS users.

Arne

On 2/17/2022 2:31 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-02-17, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 2/17/2022 2:11 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> Given that VSI has absolutely no solution for emulating Itanium
>>> systems on other architectures, it might be worth a look by them
>>> if it helps keep a few customers until x86-64 VMS is finally ready
>>> and has been in production long enough to be trusted generally.
>>>
>>> Forcing customers to go back from Itanium to Alpha so they can run
>>> as emulated systems on modern hardware is not a good situation for
>>> VSI to be placing potential customers in, given what those potential
>>> customers might end up doing instead if they are placed in that position.
>>
>> I would expect the current VMS HW supplier (that is IslandCo
>> not HP !!!!) to be able to deliver Itanium systems until 9.2
>> hits the streets and are tested.
>>
>
> Can you virtualize the hardware that David provides ?

Hmmmmm.

> I'm thinking about the push towards server consolidation on standard
> hardware that is always ongoing.

That is an argument that could make some take a look.

But if it takes just as long time to test and consider an
Itanium emulator production stable as it takes to test and consider
VMS x86-64 production stable, then ...

Arne

On 2/17/22 14:32, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 2/17/2022 2:28 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> On 2/17/22 14:08, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
>>>>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
>>>>
>>>> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
>>>>
>>>> The itanic was never a good idea.  Yeah, throw enough memory and
>>>> process shrinks at something and it will work.  Doesn't make it a
>>>> good idea.
>>>
>>> VMS users should go for x86-64.
>>>
>>> I can understand the interest from HP-UX userrs.
>>
>> I can't understand the interest in HP-UX at all.  It's just
>> another proprietary Unix and not really one of the better ones.
>> And, yes, I have had to work with it at higher than the user
>> level.
>
> There are places where they run HP-UX.

The big question is still, Why?

>
> They have a problem with HW.
>
> They can migrate from HP-UX to Linux or try to stay on HP-UX for
> some more years.
>
> Staying means either IslandCo or an emulator when new system is needed.
>
> Most will probably start migration to Linux. But some may be
> interested in emulation.

Linux is not the only available option.

>
> We know that VAX emulation is used by some VMS users.

VMS users have a reason to stay where they are. As we have
discussed here ad infinitum in some cases there is little or
no option to migrate. That is never the case with HP-UX
which is just another flavor of Unix.

bill

On 2022-02-17, abrsvc <dansabrservices@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Given the general overhead of any emulation product, I don't see any emulation effort viable for Itanium. The speeds of the Itanium hardware is such that any potential emulator would not be able to provide comparable performance levels. With the X86 port not too far out, I would believe that the x86 target is a better option. I expect that the existing Itanium hardware will last until then.
>

The product in question uses dynamic binary translation instead of the
traditional emulation setup, so it's probably not as big an overhead
as you might think:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_translation#Dynamic_binary_translation

However, I do agree that the impact would have been greater if it had
been offered starting at least a couple of years ago (if it turns out
to be a viable product for VMS).

Given how many times the x86-64 schedule has slipped, people will be
wondering if it's going to slip again, and this would be something
tangible they could have worked with in the mean time that could
solve an immediate problem and help keep them as future VSI customers.

Simon.

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

On 2/17/2022 2:43 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 2/17/22 14:32, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 2/17/2022 2:28 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> On 2/17/22 14:08, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>>> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
>>>>>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
>>>>>
>>>>> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
>>>>>
>>>>> The itanic was never a good idea.  Yeah, throw enough memory and
>>>>> process shrinks at something and it will work.  Doesn't make it a
>>>>> good idea.
>>>>
>>>> VMS users should go for x86-64.
>>>>
>>>> I can understand the interest from HP-UX userrs.
>>>
>>> I can't understand the interest in HP-UX at all.  It's just
>>> another proprietary Unix and not really one of the better ones.
>>> And, yes, I have had to work with it at higher than the user
>>> level.
>>
>> There are places where they run HP-UX.
>
> The big question is still, Why?

They picked it 20-30 years ago for whatever reason.

>> They have a problem with HW.
>>
>> They can migrate from HP-UX to Linux or try to stay on HP-UX for
>> some more years.
>>
>> Staying means either IslandCo or an emulator when new system is needed.
>>
>> Most will probably start migration to Linux. But some may be
>> interested in emulation.
>
> Linux is not the only available option.

It is not.

But the vast majority will pick Linux. That is the industry trend.

>> We know that VAX emulation is used by some VMS users.
>
> VMS users have a reason to stay where they are.  As we have
> discussed here ad infinitum in some cases there is little or
> no option to migrate.  That is never the case with HP-UX
> which is just another flavor of Unix.

Migration is always work. Code may require changes, procedures
will need to change, people may need to learn new skills.

Arne

On 2/17/22 14:48, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-02-17, abrsvc <dansabrservices@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Given the general overhead of any emulation product, I don't see any emulation effort viable for Itanium. The speeds of the Itanium hardware is such that any potential emulator would not be able to provide comparable performance levels. With the X86 port not too far out, I would believe that the x86 target is a better option. I expect that the existing Itanium hardware will last until then.
>>
>
> The product in question uses dynamic binary translation instead of the
> traditional emulation setup, so it's probably not as big an overhead
> as you might think:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_translation#Dynamic_binary_translation
>
> However, I do agree that the impact would have been greater if it had
> been offered starting at least a couple of years ago (if it turns out
> to be a viable product for VMS).
>
> Given how many times the x86-64 schedule has slipped, people will be
> wondering if it's going to slip again, and this would be something
> tangible they could have worked with in the mean time that could
> solve an immediate problem and help keep them as future VSI customers.
>

And if they start working on yet another alternative the feeling
may be that there is going to be even more slippage and that might
not be a good idea either.

bill

On 2/17/22 14:53, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 2/17/2022 2:43 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> On 2/17/22 14:32, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 2/17/2022 2:28 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>> On 2/17/22 14:08, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>> On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
>>>>>>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The itanic was never a good idea.  Yeah, throw enough memory and
>>>>>> process shrinks at something and it will work.  Doesn't make it a
>>>>>> good idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> VMS users should go for x86-64.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can understand the interest from HP-UX userrs.
>>>>
>>>> I can't understand the interest in HP-UX at all.  It's just
>>>> another proprietary Unix and not really one of the better ones.
>>>> And, yes, I have had to work with it at higher than the user
>>>> level.
>>>
>>> There are places where they run HP-UX.
>>
>> The big question is still, Why?
>
> They picked it 20-30 years ago for whatever reason.
>
>>> They have a problem with HW.
>>>
>>> They can migrate from HP-UX to Linux or try to stay on HP-UX for
>>> some more years.
>>>
>>> Staying means either IslandCo or an emulator when new system is needed.
>>>
>>> Most will probably start migration to Linux. But some may be
>>> interested in emulation.
>>
>> Linux is not the only available option.
>
> It is not.
>
> But the vast majority will pick Linux. That is the industry trend.
>
>>> We know that VAX emulation is used by some VMS users.
>>
>> VMS users have a reason to stay where they are.  As we have
>> discussed here ad infinitum in some cases there is little or
>> no option to migrate.  That is never the case with HP-UX
>> which is just another flavor of Unix.
>
> Migration is always work. Code may require changes, procedures
> will need to change, people may need to learn new skills.

Moving from VMS, probably. But moving from Unix to Unix not so
much. I just had my first opportunity to use "Unix" on a zSystem.
I use quotes because I really don't know what Unix it is. It
identifies as "OS 390". I saw nothing even vaguely unusual or
un-Unixy about it.

bill

In article <j77mqcFl71aU2@mid.individual.net>,
Bill Gunshannon <bill.gunshannon@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2/17/22 14:32, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> We know that VAX emulation is used by some VMS users.
>
>VMS users have a reason to stay where they are. As we have
>discussed here ad infinitum in some cases there is little or
>no option to migrate. That is never the case with HP-UX
>which is just another flavor of Unix.

I really don't understand the point of an HP-UX port
to x86_64. What would be available that wouldn't also
be available under, say, Linux? HP-UX was never a
very good or friendly version of Unix.

For that matter, I'm not sure I understand the point of
a VMS port to x86_64 as a long-term commercial product.
I could have seen it with the first Opertons, but not
now. In particular, what market is VSI hoping for except
legacy customers who are tied to VMS for specific
vertical applications? Why would someone make the
decision to base a new product entry on OpenVMS in 2022?

Don't get me wrong, I *like* VMS, but let's be realistic.
I doubt if they'll get much uptake beyond moving legacy
applications to modern hardware, and even then, I think
their user base will asymptotically shrink to zero as
those applications migrate to other systems.

- Dan C.

On 2/17/2022 3:05 PM, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <j77mqcFl71aU2@mid.individual.net>,
> Bill Gunshannon <bill.gunshannon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2/17/22 14:32, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> We know that VAX emulation is used by some VMS users.
>>
>> VMS users have a reason to stay where they are. As we have
>> discussed here ad infinitum in some cases there is little or
>> no option to migrate. That is never the case with HP-UX
>> which is just another flavor of Unix.
>
> I really don't understand the point of an HP-UX port
> to x86_64. What would be available that wouldn't also
> be available under, say, Linux? HP-UX was never a
> very good or friendly version of Unix.

Maybe not. But if all the code, procedures and
people skills are for HP-UX then ...

> For that matter, I'm not sure I understand the point of
> a VMS port to x86_64 as a long-term commercial product.
> I could have seen it with the first Opertons, but not
> now. In particular, what market is VSI hoping for except
> legacy customers who are tied to VMS for specific
> vertical applications? Why would someone make the
> decision to base a new product entry on OpenVMS in 2022?
>
> Don't get me wrong, I *like* VMS, but let's be realistic.
> I doubt if they'll get much uptake beyond moving legacy
> applications to modern hardware, and even then, I think
> their user base will asymptotically shrink to zero as
> those applications migrate to other systems.

Noone said that it would be easy.

But VMS does not have a chance if there is no HW
available to run it on.

If it can run on standard servers (especially in
virtualized environments) then it has a chance.

Arne

In article <620ead33$0$703$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>,
Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>On 2/17/2022 3:05 PM, Dan Cross wrote:
>> I really don't understand the point of an HP-UX port
>> to x86_64. What would be available that wouldn't also
>> be available under, say, Linux? HP-UX was never a
>> very good or friendly version of Unix.
>
>Maybe not. But if all the code, procedures and
>people skills are for HP-UX then ...

HP-UX isn't that different, even from a sysadmin
perspective, as any other Unix; most of that
know-how translates. Where it doesn't, there are
many more people in the world who know how to run
Linux than HP-UX at this point.

>> For that matter, I'm not sure I understand the point of
>> a VMS port to x86_64 as a long-term commercial product.
>> I could have seen it with the first Opertons, but not
>> now. In particular, what market is VSI hoping for except
>> legacy customers who are tied to VMS for specific
>> vertical applications? Why would someone make the
>> decision to base a new product entry on OpenVMS in 2022?
>>
>> Don't get me wrong, I *like* VMS, but let's be realistic.
>> I doubt if they'll get much uptake beyond moving legacy
>> applications to modern hardware, and even then, I think
>> their user base will asymptotically shrink to zero as
>> those applications migrate to other systems.
>
>Noone said that it would be easy.
>
>But VMS does not have a chance if there is no HW
>available to run it on.
>
>If it can run on standard servers (especially in
>virtualized environments) then it has a chance.

Sure. I just don't understand the business model.

For that matter, why not go with something analogous
to QEMU's user emulation? A "virtual VMS" sandbox
that runs as an application as a process on another
kernel?

Anyway, I certainly hopes VSI succeeds. I wonder
what their plan is.

- Dan C.

On 2/17/2022 3:13 PM, John Dallman wrote:
> In article <620ea7c6$0$694$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, arne@vajhoej.dk
> (Arne Vajhøj) wrote:
>
>> Migration is always work. Code may require changes, procedures
>> will need to change, people may need to learn new skills.
>
> People who were trained by HP on HP-UX tend to believe that it's greatly
> superior to other Unix-like OSes. They also tend to use HP-UX-specific
> methods, rather than generic Unix ones. This is not HP-specific, I've
> seen the same behaviour from Sun-trained people.
>
> An IT manager who's been defending the use of HP-UX for decades will have
> credibility problems if they suddenly abandon that view.
>
> John
>

So, they go down with the ship, huh?

:-)

Appropriate, since the itanic is most likely involved ...

--
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

On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 2:28:46 PM UTC-5, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 2/17/22 14:08, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> > On 2/17/2022 2:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> >> On 2/17/2022 9:00 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> >>> I've had some more thoughts about this and it _may_ end up being
> >>> a viable Itanium full system emulator for VSI to offer after all.
> >>
> >> My only questions are "why?" and "who would want such a thing?"
> >>
> >> The itanic was never a good idea. Yeah, throw enough memory and
> >> process shrinks at something and it will work. Doesn't make it a good
> >> idea.
> >
> > VMS users should go for x86-64.
> >
> > I can understand the interest from HP-UX userrs.
> >
> I can't understand the interest in HP-UX at all. It's just
> another proprietary Unix and not really one of the better ones.
> And, yes, I have had to work with it at higher than the user
> level.
>
> bill
Big endian

On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 3:05:11 PM UTC-5, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <j77mqc...@mid.individual.net>,
> Bill Gunshannon <bill.gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 2/17/22 14:32, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> >> We know that VAX emulation is used by some VMS users.
> >
> >VMS users have a reason to stay where they are. As we have
> >discussed here ad infinitum in some cases there is little or
> >no option to migrate. That is never the case with HP-UX
> >which is just another flavor of Unix.
> I really don't understand the point of an HP-UX port
> to x86_64. What would be available that wouldn't also
> be available under, say, Linux? HP-UX was never a
> very good or friendly version of Unix.
>
> For that matter, I'm not sure I understand the point of
> a VMS port to x86_64 as a long-term commercial product.
> I could have seen it with the first Opertons, but not
> now. In particular, what market is VSI hoping for except
> legacy customers who are tied to VMS for specific
> vertical applications? Why would someone make the
> decision to base a new product entry on OpenVMS in 2022?
>
> Don't get me wrong, I *like* VMS, but let's be realistic.
> I doubt if they'll get much uptake beyond moving legacy
> applications to modern hardware, and even then, I think
> their user base will asymptotically shrink to zero as
> those applications migrate to other systems.
>
> - Dan C.
Big endian. A little endian version of HP-UX on x86 does not offer anything.

On 2/18/2022 9:12 AM, John Dallman wrote:
> In article <69d0b812-0d53-42b6-af62-b0317973dfc9n@googlegroups.com>,
> xyzzy1959@gmail.com (John Reagan) wrote:
>> On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 2:28:46 PM UTC-5, Bill Gunshannon
>>> I can't understand the interest in HP-UX at all. It's just
>>> another proprietary Unix and not really one of the better ones.
>> Big endian
>
> What makes big-endian attractive to end-user organisations?

Maybe the price tag for verifying that all code will work when
compiled on a little endian platform and writing conversion
programs for all binary data files.

Arne