VMS is not the evil empire
JSOTTILE%LO...@cunyvm.cuny.edu
>> Is VMS as horrible as I suspect or am I alone an thinking this?
>
>You are not alone.
>>
>> Please help shed the light for us! Please tell us what you think would be
>> reasons why you wouldn't buy VMS! (or why you would). We need the help
>> of all you wizards out there. Any examples you can think of will help!
>>
>Tell him to spend some time recruiting CS students. Tell him that if
>they run VMS, no one will come to your school. Tell him about the lack
>of *real* vendor support, regardless of what they promise. There will
>be nothing for the hordes of wizards to do without source code. And
>finally, mention the lack of real, modern, compatible networking.
I am somewhat miffed here. As you can see from my address, I use VMS. I
hear all of you out there complaining and I just want to clear the air.
VMS is not as bad as you folks are making it seem. I use both UNIX and VMS
and each has their advantages.
VMS is nice for an academic atmosphere or a site where most of your users
don't want to know the details about how something works or how to do
something. As far as support, our site has had *no* problems with getting
help from DEC. In fact, I can call in at 1pm (usually the "busiest" times)
and if the department that I have my question for is unavailable, i can
expect a call from them within a hour or two. The folks of DEC are very
helpful and they know what to tell you to do and they DO explain as they
go. In fact, I was having problems calling some system services and I
bothered a guy from DEC about it and he spent about an hour on it (I mailed
my program to him). He called me back and told me what the problem was and
why it was acting that way. The fault was all mine and not DEC's.
Sometimes, RTFM doesn't quite go far enough.
The operating system itself is sound and is somewhat secure depending on
how far you really want to go. The hardware gives us little problems (we
have 2 clustered 11/785's with an HSC50 and 4 RA81s and various other
carry-overs form the old PDP 11 we had).
As far as application programming or any programming, for that matter,
there are a WHOLE lot of products and, here on bitnet, a lot of very sound
public domain code.
As a programmer, UNIX intrigues me because I have more control over devices
(as a normal user). A few students share my interest but a lot feel that
UNIX is confusing and VMS is a little more straightforward. There are a
lot of pluses on the VMS side and a lot of UNIX folks like to throw sharp
objects at it, but most bounce off of VMS.
>
>Of course, after you go thru all this, then you'll have to convince
>him to run BSD over System V.
>
>At the very least, have him stage a test, in which some VMS and some
>UNIX systems are supported. See which one is preferred. At least you'll
>be able to salvage the hardware.
>
I won't take that as in insult to VMS, but it all depends on your
application. If you need a system for programmers and "tech-ies" then UNIX
would probably be your best bet. But, if you have a lot of users who don't
care about the nitty-gritties then a good systems manager and a few systems
programmers will work out rather nicely.
>> Thanks for your cooperation and knowledge. Is VMS that bad??
>
>Not if you enjoy banging your head against the wall.
I still have a round-ish head, no flat spots here.
>
> National Bureau of Standards
> Flamer's Hotline: (301) 975-5688
>FOOLED you! Absorb EGO SHATTERING impulse rays, polyester poltroon!!
- John Sottile
(jsot...@loyvax.bitnet)
Student Systems Manager
Student Systems Programmer
Loyola College in Maryland
Constuctive Criticism Welcomed.
Eric J. Johnson
> As far as support, our site has had *no* problems with getting
>help from DEC. In fact, I can call in at 1pm (usually the "busiest" times)
>and if the department that I have my question for is unavailable, i can
>expect a call from them within a hour or two.
We, too have had VERY good luck with DEC support, that is, as long as
it is one of our VMS VAXen that has problems...
Not too long ago, one of our Ultrix 1.2 730's lost its R80 drive. True
to form, their field service person arrived here within a few hours.
Diagnostics showed the drive bad, so a new one was shipped here over-nite.
The next day, the new drive was installed, diagnostics run on it (a-ok) and
we tried loading Ultrix. No luck, once bootstrapped from tape, Ultrix
rejected the new drive as bad. (I can't recall the exact message now)
While the local tech re-ran diagnostics, we got on the phone with the
Ultrix support people who (after some digging around: "now, where is that
IDC manual") were able to tell me that, yes indeed, the drive was bad.
Since the 'diagnostics' had told the tech that there was nothing wrong
with the drive, he was not, however inclined to believe the problem could
be there... Just to prove it, we boot VMS, it works just fine.
Well, after another few days of swapping boards in the new drive itself,
the local people brought out a drive they were using in their local
office. We boot Ultrix, *a miracle occurs*, the new drive works.
Amazing, one week to replace a disk drive.
What does this have to do with choosing VMS over Ultrix? Well, at least
in our area, one would probably receive better *local* support for VMS
than Ultrix. KEEP IN MIND I am referring to LOCAL support! Both VMS
and Ultrix 'OS' (long distance call) level support for us has been excellent.
--
Eric J. Johnson UUCP: er...@hdr.UUCP || ...!{ihnp4, codas}!hdr!eric
Amperif Corporation. CIS: 72460,11 BIX: ericj
My Previous Pontiac was a *Four-door* Tempest 326 Big Block V-8 (SO THERE!)
Crusher... Crusher? We don't need no Wesley Crusher!
William E. Davidsen Jr
>[...]
>What does this have to do with choosing VMS over Ultrix? Well, at least
>in our area, one would probably receive better *local* support for VMS
>than Ultrix. KEEP IN MIND I am referring to LOCAL support! Both VMS
>and Ultrix 'OS' (long distance call) level support for us has been excellent.
I think the quality of support has to do with the question asked. If
they know the answer you get good service. If they don't you may spend
some time convincing them that the problem is real. We spent a month
waiting to get Message Router v1.x talking to v2.x. I'm told that this
is true of other vendors ;-<
--
bill davidsen (we...@ge-crd.arpa)
{uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
Barry Shein
>What does this have to do with choosing VMS over Ultrix? Well, at least
>in our area, one would probably receive better *local* support for VMS
>than Ultrix. KEEP IN MIND I am referring to LOCAL support! Both VMS
>and Ultrix 'OS' (long distance call) level support for us has been excellent.
>
>--
>Eric J. Johnson UUCP: er...@hdr.UUCP || ...!{ihnp4, codas}!hdr!eric
DEC's pathological resistance to providing hardware service on Vaxes
running Ultrix or Unix is a good reason not to buy Vaxes, it's no
reason not to buy Unix which can be had from responsible vendors.
This has been known for years as the "We can't fix it because it runs
Unix(Ultrix)" DEC field service standard excuse #1. There are few
people who have tried to run Unix on vaxes who haven't run into this,
often in serious ways (like yours, down for a week to replace a disk
drive and the vendor resisting the solution.) I had a tty mux down for
weeks while they did this finger pointing (on a 780), the final
resolution was that there was no +5 volts on the backplane segment (it
had burned out, was actually charred when they took it apart.) Right,
musta been Unix's fault...it's just a good excuse that unfortunately
is accepted by their field service management.
-Barry Shein, Boston University
Rob Robertson
>DEC's pathological resistance to providing hardware service on Vaxes
>running Ultrix or Unix is a good reason not to buy Vaxes, it's no
>reason not to buy Unix which can be had from responsible vendors.
>
>This has been known for years as the "We can't fix it because it runs
>Unix(Ultrix)" DEC field service standard excuse #1.
i hate to start defending dec, but......
my experience with their hardware field service personnel has been
excellent. we run 4.3 and when ever we had a problem they have been
out here and have fixed the problem, no complaining, no comments.
occasionally i've been told "under vms we could run disk resident
diags, 'cause your running unix we're going to have to boot the
standalone diagnostics." which is entirely reasonable.
now Systems Industries... the first question our SI FE asks on any
service call is, "did you change the software recently?" if yes is
the answer our drives can be smoking, and he'll blame the software.
our problems with their inability to deal with unix (such as a
complete set of standalone diags) are endless.
pardon my bitching.
rob
william robertson
r...@philabs.philips.com
Frederick M. Avolio
>>than Ultrix. KEEP IN MIND I am referring to LOCAL support! Both VMS
>>and Ultrix 'OS' (long distance call) level support for us has been excellent.
>DEC's pathological resistance to providing hardware service on Vaxes
>running Ultrix or Unix is a good reason not to buy Vaxes, ...
>This has been known for years as the "We can't fix it because it runs
>Unix(Ultrix)" DEC field service standard excuse #1. ...
>...it's just a good excuse that unfortunately
>is accepted by their field service management.
Not any more. Ken Olsen has made it clear that we support UNIX and
VMS equally, we fund them equally, and with the same level of
committment. (This in a *very* recent clarification statement on
Digital's UNIX commitment.)
If you are still getting that kind of garbage from field engineers,
yell good and hard about it! (Drop *me* a note... I can't do
anything, but I promise to yell also.) VAX diagnostics run under
Ultrix as well as under VMS. And the support structure for field
service is in place up north -- has been for quite some time -- to
support them when/if they get into a jam that requires talking to an
operating system engineer.
Will Ken Olsen making such a statement as mentioned fix everything
overnight? Certainly not. Will it happen just because he wants it
to? Probably...
Fred
David F. Carlson
>
> >What does this have to do with choosing VMS over Ultrix? Well, at least
>
>
> Unix(Ultrix)" DEC field service standard excuse #1. There are few
We had a VAX 750 that worked wonderfully with its ra81 (380Meg disk).
Suddenly (over a period of a week) several very strange hard errors
occurred on the drive. DEC says "can't fix it: it runs UNIX" but they
charge us for the service call anyway! For several months we used
fsck, ncheck, and low level formatters: but the problem would reoccur
elsewhere on the volume. Some sixth months later DEC sends a notice
to all sites with ra81's that the *glue* they used to afix the head assemblies
was defective and would cause all sorts of messes. After replacing the
entire HDA (head/disk assembly), which was the only fix, the drive
hasn't had a problem since. But VMS diags the tech service people
had ran with no problems!
So VMS must be better. :-)
--
David F. Carlson, Micropen, Inc.
...!{ames|harvard|rutgers|topaz|...}!rochester!ur-valhalla!micropen!dave
"The faster I go, the behinder I get." --Lewis Carroll
Louis Schmittroth
| >in our area, one would probably receive better *local* support for VMS
| >than Ultrix. KEEP IN MIND I am referring to LOCAL support! Both VMS
| >and Ultrix 'OS' (long distance call) level support for us has been excellent.
| >
| >--
| >Eric J. Johnson UUCP: er...@hdr.UUCP || ...!{ihnp4, codas}!hdr!eric
|
| DEC's pathological resistance to providing hardware service on Vaxes
| running Ultrix or Unix is a good reason not to buy Vaxes, it's no
| reason not to buy Unix which can be had from responsible vendors.
There is not only no reason to go with VMS, there is no reason to go
with DEC, unless you have already locked yourself into VMS. I have seen
vendors come and go since before DEC was incorporated, and welcomed
UNIX as the best thing that ever happened to the computer field for
two reasons: a superior development system, and a vendor-independent
platform for applications. The only thing wrong with going with UNIX
is the large number of choices. You really have to do some decision
making to find your way around the vendors. If you want ultimate
answers in religion and computers, then of course go with IBM ...
Otherwise, try Sun, Sequent, NCR, Unisys, AT&T, ...
Louis Schmittroth My employer has no opinions.
Computer Science
Athabasca University ...{ubc-vision, ihnp4}!alberta!auvax!louis
--
Louis Schmittroth My employer has no opinions.
Computer Science
Athabasca University ...{ubc-vision, ihnp4}!alberta!auvax!louis
Rick Peralta
>...
>I have seen
>vendors come and go since before DEC ...
>
Score DEC!
--
Rick Peralta, Encore Computer Corp, Marlboro MA (617) 460-0500
arpa: per...@multimax.arpa (192.5.63.14)
uucp: {allegra,decvax,ihnp4,linus,necntc,talcott}!encore!peralta
"Once you've got all the questions; the answers should be easy."
Barry Shein
Fred Avolio replying to me...
>>This has been known for years as the "We can't fix it because it runs
>>Unix(Ultrix)" DEC field service standard excuse #1. ...
>>...it's just a good excuse that unfortunately
>>is accepted by their field service management.
>
>Not any more. Ken Olsen has made it clear that we support UNIX and
>VMS equally, we fund them equally, and with the same level of
>committment. (This in a *very* recent clarification statement on
>Digital's UNIX commitment.)
I will say in all fairness that all we as customerss can report is
historical experience and people like Fred and Ray Lanza (and Armando
Stettner) have long expressed their frustration/displeasure when they
hear stories like these and always were interested in trying to see
what can be done. Whatever changes are occurring it's certainly not
for lack of the Ultrix people trying, perhaps it's finally sinking in
(nothing like losing a couple of billion dollar contracts to focus the
mind I always say...)
Now, if they can only convince the sales people that inviting them
down to bid a Vax for running Unix is *not* an invitation to run
around trying to convince ignorant administrators that what they
*really* want is VMS, using standard FUD [Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt]
tactics [like, we won't be able to fix it...], all these things make
us hesitate to ring DEC's phone like you wouldn't believe, a simple
bid turns into a war zone when these losers start that crap (I won't
even mention some of the pitiful attempts to push DECNOT, um, DNA,
and the infamous "Grab the Network!" internal sales memos.)
We've really got to cut this issue into parts, in my experience there
are huge differences between the Ultrix folks and the *DEC/VMS HEGEMONY*.
I like the Ultrix folks, I even let them buy me dinner occasionally :-)
-Barry Shein, Boston University
Andrew Siegel
>running Ultrix or Unix is a good reason not to buy Vaxes, it's no
>reason not to buy Unix which can be had from responsible vendors.
Correction (partial): DEC *does* support VAXes running ULTRIX.
We've had ULTRIX since June '85, and have had hardware support all
along.
They may not know what to *do* with ULTRIX, but at least they'll
service the machines.
--
Andrew Siegel, N2CN NBC Computer Imaging, New York, NY
{philabs,steinmetz,ge-dab}!nbc1!abs (212)664-5776
Fuat C. Baran
>Not any more. Ken Olsen has made it clear that we support UNIX and
>VMS equally, we fund them equally, and with the same level of
>committment. (This in a *very* recent clarification statement on
>Digital's UNIX commitment.)
>
Does this mean Ultrix is now getting as much funding as VMS is
currently getting? Doesn't VMS have a head start, and things aren't
equal yet...
>VAX diagnostics run under Ultrix as well as under VMS.
DEC Local recently brought in a VMS RA60 pack to be able to run
diagnostics on our 8700. Are you sure ALL VAX diagnostics exist under
Ultrix? i.e. can an Ultrix site run without ever hearing anything
about VMS?
--Fuat
--
ARPANET: fu...@columbia.edu U.S. MAIL: Columbia University
BITNET: fu...@cunixc.columbia.edu Center for Computing Activities
USENET: ...!rutgers!columbia!cunixc!fuat 712 Watson Labs, 612 W115th St.
PHONE: (212) 280-5128 New York, NY 10025
Derek E. Terveer
> In article <20...@bu-cs.BU.EDU> b...@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes:
> >This has been known for years as the "We can't fix it because it runs
> >Unix(Ultrix)" DEC field service standard excuse #1.
>
I have to agree with rob. I run 6 unix systems, two of them 11/780s with a DEC
maintenance contract, and i can always count on dec field service, in spite of
the fact that we run at&t unix; not even ultrix. The other vendors have given
me much less than satisfactory performance in a number of cases. This doesn't
mean that i like VMS, quite the contrary, i much prefer unix, but the DEC field
service *WE* have around here doesn't offer "DEC field service standard excuse
#1". They break their collective butts keeping my hardware up and running and
I really appreciate it!
--
Derek Terveer d...@hawkmoon.MN.ORG uunet!rosevax!elric!hawkmoon!det
Sharan Kalwani
>>DEC's pathological resistance to providing hardware service on Vaxes
>>running Ultrix or Unix is a good reason not to buy Vaxes, ...
>
>>This has been known for years as the "We can't fix it because it runs
>>Unix(Ultrix)" DEC field service standard excuse #1. ...
>>...it's just a good excuse that unfortunately
>>is accepted by their field service management.
>
>Not any more. Ken Olsen has made it clear that we support UNIX and
>VMS equally, we fund them equally, and with the same level of
>committment. (This in a *very* recent clarification statement on
>Digital's UNIX commitment.)
Maybe so, but Ken Olsen isn't going to come to my site and fix
things and I *still* have to deal with Field Circus Engineers who
love to bash UNIX to a point where even VMS-lovers would cringe and tend
to agree that UNIX just doesn't deserve such a bad rap.
>If you are still getting that kind of garbage from field engineers,
>yell good and hard about it! (Drop *me* a note... I can't do
>anything, but I promise to yell also.) VAX diagnostics run under
>Ultrix as well as under VMS.
I've been yelling long and hard and finally my throat gave up.
I've been asking for *exactly* that kind of help but what do I get
- zilch!. All it got me was their Field man all dressed up nattily
(it does seem DEC is beginning to look more and more like IBM these days)
come over and try to give me this BS about why VMS should been used
in the first place, etc., etc.... and the hardware was fine and dandy
the whole fault was that of software (namely UNIX).
My advice to the person who originally asked the question:
Help save us from VMS - was that if you feel like being royally
scr**ed, sure go ahead and get DEC/VMS all the way thru.
Sorry for the vitriolic burst, but I had to get it off my chest.
Usual disclaimers apply.
--
sharan kalwani. mcf, 110 east warren detroit mi 48201. (313) 833-0710 x411
USENET: ..!{ihnp4!mibte, uunet!umix, philabs!fmsrl7, ucbvax!mtxinu}!mcf!shan
INTERNET: shan%mcf....@umix.cc.umich.edu
DEC's EASYNET: DECWRL::"umix.cc.umich.edu!mcf!shan"
George W. Leach
>In article <20...@bu-cs.BU.EDU> b...@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes:
>>DEC's pathological resistance to providing hardware service on Vaxes
>>running Ultrix or Unix is a good reason not to buy Vaxes, it's no
>>reason not to buy Unix which can be had from responsible vendors.
>
>Correction (partial): DEC *does* support VAXes running ULTRIX.
>We've had ULTRIX since June '85, and have had hardware support all
>along.
Well when I was with Bellcore our lab utilized Ultrix 1.0 on some
VAX 780's. I really don't remember how the hardware support was, but I
never heard any complaints. The complaints were on the software front.
In order for the system administrator to perform diagnostic tests, s/he
would first have to boot VMS!!! Another problem we had was that we were
sold a machine with 16 Mg of main memory. Ultrix only could address 8 Mg!
Now, of course all that has changed and it was their first attempt at
UNIX, but VMS was king and the Ultrix customers were well aware of it. That
led us to drop DEC and go with Pyramid and CCI for our development machines.
The experiences with DEC left a bad taste in people's mouths. Those kinds
of experiences are rather difficult to overcome, even if DEC has allegedly
changed their tune on Ultrix.
--
George W. Leach Paradyne Corporation
{gatech,rutgers,attmail}!codas!pdn!reggie Mail stop LF-207
Phone: (813) 530-2376 P.O. Box 2826
Largo, FL 34649-2826
Stop calling me Fred
) >Barry Shein:
) >>DEC's pathological resistance to providing hardware service on Vaxes
) >>running Ultrix or Unix is a good reason not to buy Vaxes, ...
) Frederick M. Avolio:
) >Not any more. Ken Olsen has made it clear that we support UNIX and
) >VMS equally, ...
Sharan Kalwani:
) Maybe so, but Ken Olsen isn't going to come to my site and fix
) things and I *still* have to deal with Field Circus Engineers who
) love to bash UNIX ...
Maybe it all depends on your local field service office. We had a
vax from '83 to early '87 and our local field service office never
weasled us about the fact that we ran (BSD) unix. They even spent
days tracking down an obscure hardware problem that is invisible
under VMS!
________________________________________________________
Matt University ma...@oddjob.uchicago.edu
Crawford of Chicago {astrovax,ihnp4}!oddjob!matt
John Kullmann
--
John Kullmann
Apple Computer Inc.
Voice: 408-973-2939
Fax: 408-973-6489
Rick Adams
you run UNIX, you might consider having Control Data maintain your
DEC equipment (yes CDC does do DEC maintenance).
We switched to CDC a few years ago and have no regrets. The service is
better, they don't bitch about unix (although they occasionally ask
for help in interpreting some of the more obscure unix error messages.
I find that quite acceptable), and they ended up saving us quite
a bit of money over DEC maintenance. (Money was not the
major issue. Response time and ineptness of service once they
actually responded was a big factor)
I don't know if DEC maintenance has improved locally in the past few
years, but we have no reason to try them and see.
(We are running "real" 4.3bsd as opposed to Ultrix, etc)
---rick
Dave Cornutt
> Another problem we had was that we were
> sold a machine with 16 Mg of main memory. Ultrix only could address 8 Mg!
Sounds like the old MS780E memory interleaving trick. Back in 1983, the
company that I worked for at the time bought a 780 with one of the first
E controllers (and only 2M of memory!). When we put Interactive IS/3
(a SysIII-based system) up on it, we noticed the same problem...only half
of the memory was visible. After a couple of hours of probing around in
our (fortunately new) VAX Hardware Handbook, we discovered how to enable
the memory interleving on the controller and make all of the memory
visible. I don't remember the details now, but all it took was a couple
of register pokes. We put the necessary commands in the console boot
file and it worked fine.
The amusing thing was that, when we booted up VMS (I think the current
version at the time was 2.3), it didn't do it right either! And whenever
the FS people ran the micro diags, they were always stunned with micro
#2 told them that it couldn't find the memory controller. I then had
to show them the secret, mysterious micro #3 disk. (I once spent 20
minutes on the phone with someone from Remote Diag trying to convince
them that there was such a thing. I eventually gave up, hung up the
phone, and called back in the hopes that I wouldn't get the same person.
Fortunately, I didn't.)
This was all five years ago. Fortunately, things appear to have changed
for the better since then.
--
Dave Cornutt, AT&T Bell Labs (rm 4A406), Holmdel, NJ (Note new address!)
UUCP:{ihnp4,allegra,cbosgd}!hotly!dkc (path stolen from Shelley)
"The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily my employer's, not
necessarily mine, and probably not necessary"
Sharan Kalwani
Now that is a very very interesting statement, I seem to recall recently
seeing in YAITRs pictures of Apple and DEC big shots smiling and shaking
hands. John, would you care to share your thoughts why (publicly or
privately) ?
--
sharan "alf" kalwani. 110 east warren detroit mi 48201. (313) 833-0710 x411
USENET: ...!{ihnp4!mibte, uunet!umix, philabs!fmsrl7, ucbvax!mtxinu}!mcf!shan
INTERNET: shan%mcf....@umix.cc.umich.edu BITNET: mcf!sh...@psuvax1.BITNET
Frederick M. Avolio
>Does this mean Ultrix is now getting as much funding as VMS is
>currently getting? Doesn't VMS have a head start, and things aren't
>equal yet...
Yes, they get equal funding. Well, very nearly. And yes, VMS has a
head start. The issue is support. Is it all *there* yet? No. When
Lincoln declared all the slaves free did they all start living like
they were free right off? No. The apostle Paul says that all who are
born of the Spirit are new creation and the "old man is dead." Do all
such people change the way they live over night? No. (Wonderful
analogies, eh?) The question isn't "Ultrix vs. VMS" as much as "is
Unix(tm) important to Digital as a whole and in particular in the
executive suite of the Mill?" The answer is yes.
>>VAX diagnostics run under Ultrix as well as under VMS.
>
>DEC Local recently brought in a VMS RA60 pack to be able to run
>diagnostics on our 8700. Are you sure ALL VAX diagnostics exist under
>Ultrix? i.e. can an Ultrix site run without ever hearing anything
>about VMS?
VAX Level 3 diagnostics can be installed and will boot from an ULTRIX
or VMS machine.
Fred
Dick St.Peters
>
> Now, of course all that has changed and it was their first attempt at
It was more like their zero'th attempt. When we got Ultrix 1.0, we
bought source - and paid a bundle for it. It looked a bit familiar -
in fact, it was essentially identical to the BSD 4.2 source we already
had. After dozens of diffs, the only difference I ever found was in
the kernel source: DEC had replaced one BSD macro with a procedure.
Management bought installation, but when the FE showed up to do the
install, we already had Ultrix running. Good thing too, 'cuz the FE
had never installed it.
However, DEC has come a long way since then, and instead of bashing
them for taking so long to get on the UNIX bandwagon, shouldn't we be
welcoming them aboard?
--
Dick St.Peters
GE Corporate R&D, Schenectady, NY
stpe...@ge-crd.arpa
uunet!steinmetz!stpeters
Sharan Kalwani
>
..some material deleted...
>(I once spent 20
>minutes on the phone with someone from Remote Diag trying to convince
>them that there was such a thing. I eventually gave up, hung up the
>phone, and called back in the hopes that I wouldn't get the same person.
>Fortunately, I didn't.)
A very amusing story of how the FS folks got surprised by a micro diag
failing and later some problem with Remote Diag folks (which got
resolved also in an amusing manner)]
While I did not have the same memory problem, on my 750 the VMS diags
would routinely fail and the FS folks would dutifully take the printout and
promise to check and let me know. This went on for months before I discovered
that there was a bug in that version of the diag (called ECKAM or something,
they sure pick odd names :-)! The reason it failed was because the diag needed
a minimum of 6 meg to run correctly :-) and we had 4 meg.
Well then once RDC called in and ran the same usual tests - they told me
I had failing memory and it should be replaced. I then had to try to convince
that that was not the problem and finally ended up asking for their
senior most engineer there. He listened and took my reference about the
bug, dug it up and agreeded that it was indeed the case.
I have since upgraded it to 8 Meg and yes the diag now works correctly :-)
>This was all five years ago. Fortunately, things appear to have changed
>for the better since then.
Well this happened roughly two years ago, but recently I got a call from someone
at DEC telling me things are now improving. Let's hope he is right
and we can expect more understanding support persons.
>Dave Cornutt, AT&T Bell Labs (rm 4A406), Holmdel, NJ (Note new address!)
>UUCP:{ihnp4,allegra,cbosgd}!hotly!dkc (path stolen from Shelley)
Sharan Kalwani
>The question isn't "Ultrix vs. VMS" as much as "is
>Unix(tm) important to Digital as a whole and in particular in the
>executive suite of the Mill?" The answer is yes.
Fred, I hope you are right about that. I would like to see that reflected
with the people I have to deal with and not some one in distant DEC-land.
And if they do, how will they handle the diagnostics that are necessary?
(and *NO* I am not talking about Ultrix here).
Rich Salz
However, DEC has come a long way since then, and instead of bashing
them for taking so long to get on the UNIX bandwagon, shouldn't we be
welcoming them aboard?
Excellent point!
They're obviously still lacking in some areas (no nameserver -- hell, when
one of their own engineers wrote BIND! -- makes Ultrix all but unuseable
on the Internet), but by all their statements, and from DEC presentations
I've been to, they know they're lagging (I heard someone admit it :-), and
they seem real sincere in their catch-up efforts.
Complaints about specific field offices posted to a world-wide network
are probably less effective at causing change than a sharp well-worded
letter sent to the regional office.
/r$
--
Please send comp.sources.unix-related mail to rs...@uunet.uu.net.
ag...@ccvaxa.uucp
>>No, VMS *IS* the evil empire.
>>
>>Apple Computer Inc.
>
>seeing in YAITRs pictures of Apple and DEC big shots smiling and shaking
>hands. John, would you care to share your thoughts why (publicly or
>privately) ?
>
Give the guy a break. Don't get his opinions mixed up with his company's,
unless he says so explicitly - and then check. As somebody who has gotten
into trouble for things said on the net, I can avow that life would be
easier if people did not read every statement by j...@widget.com as an
official statement by Wiget, Inc.
Andy "Krazy" Glew. Gould CSD-Urbana. 1101 E. University, Urbana, IL 61801
ag...@gould.com - preferred, if you have MX records
ag...@xenurus.gould.com - if you don't
...!ihnp4!uiucuxc!ccvaxa!aglew - paths may still be the only way
My opinions are my own, and are not the opinions of my employer, or any
other organisation. I indicate my company only so that the reader may
account for any possible bias I may have towards our products.
Sharan Kalwani
>Complaints about specific field offices posted to a world-wide network
>are probably less effective at causing change than a sharp well-worded
>letter sent to the regional office.
On the contrary, it makes folks in parts of DEC that matter, aware if
something is wrong and gets them involved in the action bringing
some heat (and light) to bear on any problem.
--
sharan "alf" kalwani. 110 east warren detroit mi 48201. (313) 833-0710 x411
Ron Kleinman
>In article <25...@pdn.UUCP> reg...@pdn.UUCP (George W. Leach) writes:
>> Well when I was with Bellcore our lab utilized Ultrix 1.0 on some
>>VAX 780's. ...
>>
>> Now, of course all that has changed and it was their first attempt at
>>UNIX, ...
>It was more like their zero'th attempt. When we got Ultrix 1.0, we
>bought source - and paid a bundle for it. It looked a bit familiar -
>in fact, it was essentially identical to the BSD 4.2 source we already
>had. After dozens of diffs, the only difference I ever found was in
>the kernel source: DEC had replaced one BSD macro with a procedure.
>
Seconded. When we got that version of Ultrix, I tried out the "finger"
command, and was informed by this DEC operating system that the
location I was giving was illegal, as it wasn't in Evans or Colby
Hall (I think I've got that right .. this was awhile ago) which were
apparently located on the Berkeley campus. I reported the problem and
it went away with the next release.
>Management bought installation, but when the FE showed up to do the
>install, we already had Ultrix running. Good thing too, 'cuz the FE
>had never installed it.
>
Worse .. they had to reboot VMS to run any diagnostics that first release.
We had a disk problem which didn't show under VMS. The big difference
was in attitude ... when BSD4.2 did it, the DEC people yawned, when
Ultrix showed the problem they at least sounded concerned.
>However, DEC has come a long way since then, and instead of bashing
>them for taking so long to get on the UNIX bandwagon, shouldn't we be
>welcoming them aboard?
>
Seconded. They've added some nice features to Unix, DECnet being one
of them.