Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

New free Alpha emulator - AlphaVM-free

3,474 views
Skip to first unread message

artem

unread,
Mar 31, 2011, 7:15:27 PM3/31/11
to
Hi everyone,

I would like to announce a field test release of a new free Alpha emulator - AlphaVM-free. This emulator is made to replace full Alpha systems. You are free to use it for hobbyist or commercial purposes. It has no expiration date; the registration is not needed.

This emulator currently runs on 32 and 64 bit incarnations of Windows 7; the 64-bit build is faster. Please visit http://emuvm.com for more information and downloads.

In the near future we are planning to come up with a commercial version, which will among other improvements have better performance.

Artem Alimarin

MG

unread,
Mar 31, 2011, 9:00:07 PM3/31/11
to
On 1-4-2011 1:15, artem wrote:
> I would like to announce a field test release of a new free Alpha emulator - AlphaVM-free. This emulator is made to replace full Alpha systems. You are free to use it for hobbyist or commercial purposes. It has no expiration date; the registration is not needed.
>
> This emulator currently runs on 32 and 64 bit incarnations of Windows 7; the 64-bit build is faster. Please visit http://emuvm.com for more information and downloads.

It's a nice touch that I can now freely emulate a bit more powerful
AXP system, an HP AlphaServer DS20 with an EV6 at ~524 MHz and 512 MB
RAM even. It's also a nice touch that one can generate larger virtual
disks, like an RZ59.

Besides the graphical user interface, it reminds me a lot of FreeAXP
and Personal AXP. Even some of the naming conventions (like the CD-ROM
device name naming convention "\\.\Cdrom0").

Either way, thanks for sharing!

- MG

MG

unread,
Mar 31, 2011, 9:02:10 PM3/31/11
to
On 1-4-2011 3:00, MG wrote:
> Besides the graphical user interface, it reminds me a lot of FreeAXP
> and Personal AXP.

(Correction: I of course meant Personal Alpha. - MG)

artem

unread,
Mar 31, 2011, 9:31:15 PM3/31/11
to
The basic idea is indeed the same as of PA and FreeAXP - it is a whole-system replacement of Alpha systems.

The free version is still limited in performance. It is EV6 functionally, but significantly slower. The performance is still to be done and it is left for a commercial version ;-)

The \\.\Cdrom0 thing is just Windows name for a Cdrom device, that is why it is the same. Later I'll make a better way of selecting a cdrom device.

VAXman-

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 8:09:47 AM4/1/11
to

Another crap-Weendoze only emulation.

--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

All your spirit rack abuses, come to haunt you back by day.
All your Byzantine excuses, given time, given you away.

Michael Kraemer

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 7:49:55 AM4/1/11
to
In article <00AAD3C4...@SendSpamHere.ORG>, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:
> In article
> <670a13c3-670a-46ea...@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>,
> artem <brako...@gmail.com> writes:
> >The basic idea is indeed the same as of PA and FreeAXP - it is a whole-system
> replacement of Alpha systems.
> >
> >The free version is still limited in performance. It is EV6 functionally, but
> significantly slower. The performance is still to be done and it is left for a
> commercial version ;-)
> >
> >The \\.\Cdrom0 thing is just Windows name for a Cdrom device, that is why it
> is the same. Later I'll make a better way of selecting a cdrom device.
>
> Another crap-Weendoze only emulation.

Palmer's curse, called "Affinity".

VAXman-

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 9:31:17 AM4/1/11
to

I'd be ROTFLMFAO if it wasn't sadly true.

MG

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 9:10:00 AM4/1/11
to
On 1-4-2011 3:31, artem wrote:
> The basic idea is indeed the same as of PA and FreeAXP - it is awhole-
> system replacement of Alpha systems.

Nonetheless, you did a very good job!

For those who want to learn more about VMS and get the opportunity to
try/use it and who are not fortunate enough to come across good second-
hand VAX, Alpha or IA-64 deals, they can fortunately still emulate with
excellent software such as this.

Ultimately, I hope this will prove to be useful for the cause of VMS.


> The free version is still limited in performance. It is EV6functionally,
> but significantly slower. The performance is still to be done and it

> isleft for a commercial version ;-)

I'm also very satisfied in that respect! Though, I haven't really
compared the performance with, say, FreeAXP and Personal Alpha.


> The \\.\Cdrom0 thing is just Windows name for a Cdrom device, thatis why it


> is the same. Later I'll make a better way of selecting a cdrom device.

Thanks for clearing that up, it has been a while since I developed
anything for Windows. I only have one Windows system which I'm more
or less forced to use for university work (for certain software).

- MG

Ramon Jimenez

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 9:48:32 AM4/1/11
to
On 1 abr, 01:15, artem <brakozi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> This emulator currently runs on 32 and 64 bit incarnations of Windows 7; the 64-bit build is faster. Please visithttp://emuvm.comfor more information and downloads.

Hi, isn't there any version for Window XP?

Regards

artem

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 9:55:27 AM4/1/11
to
Would you be interested in a Linux version? The framework of the emulator has been developed on both Windows and Linux/posix/cygwin. So it is not far from running on Linux, but there would be no user interface, which is probably not so big problem for you.

If you wanted to attract as much people as possible to a product, on which system would you choose to release first?

Hein RMS van den Heuvel

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 10:00:28 AM4/1/11
to
On Apr 1, 9:55 am, artem <brakozi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Would you be interested in a Linux version? The framework of the emulator has been developed on both Windows and Linux/posix/cygwin. So it is not far from running on Linux, but there would be no user interface, which is probably not so big problem for you.
>
> If you wanted to attract as much people as possible to a product, on which system would you choose to release first?

Considering that there are 2 fine Alplha emulator options available on
windows already, I would think that a strong Linux base would add
differentiation value.

How many Alpha Emulators does the world need?

2c

Hein

Ramon Jimenez

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 10:02:09 AM4/1/11
to
On 1 abr, 15:55, artem <brakozi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> If you wanted to attract as much people as possible to a product, on which system would you choose to release first?

Most used one, altough wikipedia is not always a reliable source for
info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems

It would be interestering to know who requieres and Alpha Emulator and
this is not a question too simple to answer.


Paul Sture

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 10:15:27 AM4/1/11
to

I agree. An Alpha emulator which supports more than one platform
is also a differentiator at the moment, especially considering the
recent shenanigins with Oracle.

artem

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 10:40:02 AM4/1/11
to
No, at the moment there is no version for XP.

We have started with a limited number of supported configurations to limit the number of combinations we have to test. Later we will add support of other host configurations.

JF Mezei

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 11:17:36 AM4/1/11
to
From a hobbyist point of view, I am not sure windows weenies would be
interested in VMS. Linux or OS-X ones would.

From a business point of view, since servers are going Linux instead of
Windows, having a linux server act as a host for VMS would make more sense.

Paul Sture

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 11:44:28 AM4/1/11
to

Linux is also moving forward in the virtual machine world.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2wdlavq

I've had a play with KVM (the Linux virtual host) and it certainly
works. It's designed to host server rather than GUI based
clients (think lean and mean).


Sprag

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 12:04:43 PM4/1/11
to
On Apr 1, 9:55 am, artem <brakozi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Would you be interested in a Linux version? The framework of the emulator has been developed on both Windows and Linux/posix/cygwin. So it is not far from running on Linux, but there would be no user interface, which is probably not so big problem for you.
>
> If you wanted to attract as much people as possible to a product, on which system would you choose to release first?

I'm just a hobbyist, but I'd think that RHEL 5/6 or Centos 5/6 would
catch the bulk of the people who'd be using it for serious things

VAXman-

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 2:25:40 PM4/1/11
to
In article <9176b364-b0b0-4132...@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>, artem <brako...@gmail.com> writes:
>Would you be interested in a Linux version? The framework of the emulator h=
>as been developed on both Windows and Linux/posix/cygwin. So it is not far =
>from running on Linux, but there would be no user interface, which is proba=
>bly not so big problem for you.=20

I'm all for a Linux version. A command line is just fine with me and, in
fact, preferable.

>If you wanted to attract as much people as possible to a product, on which =


>system would you choose to release first?

Anything but WEENDOZE!

VAXman-

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 2:26:45 PM4/1/11
to
In article <efd3fa37-bd38-48c7...@y26g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, Hein RMS van den Heuvel <heinvand...@gmail.com> writes:
>On Apr 1, 9:55=A0am, artem <brakozi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Would you be interested in a Linux version? The framework of the emulator=
> has been developed on both Windows and Linux/posix/cygwin. So it is not fa=
>r from running on Linux, but there would be no user interface, which is pro=

>bably not so big problem for you.
>>
>> If you wanted to attract as much people as possible to a product, on whic=

>h system would you choose to release first?
>
>Considering that there are 2 fine Alplha emulator options available on
>windows already, I would think that a strong Linux base would add
>differentiation value.
>
>How many Alpha Emulators does the world need?
>
>2c
>
>Hein

A simple "# apt-get install" would be even more attractive!

Paul Sture

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 3:09:07 PM4/1/11
to
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:26:45 GMT
VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

> A simple "# apt-get install" would be even more attractive!

Agreed. Once you get used to apt-get, PRODUCT INSTALL followed by a
bunch of largely unnecessary questons seems quaint.

And you can bash those "apt-get install" instructions into a script

and if you try Linux Mint (a desktop distribution aimed at those who
simply want a working system, proprietary code included), there's a
nice utility to save your software selection and restore it to a new
system. It's neat. A few minutes after creating a new system, you can
have a duplicate with your software selection all there.

P.S. A vote for claws-mail here. It looks very like Apple Mail (caveat
it's somewhat slower on connecting to an IMAP server), but it can do
newsgroups as well.

Bob Eager

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 4:21:05 PM4/1/11
to
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 21:09:07 +0200, Paul Sture wrote:

> And you can bash those "apt-get install" instructions into a script

'pkg_add' is equally nice on FreeBSD.

> P.S. A vote for claws-mail here. It looks very like Apple Mail (caveat
> it's somewhat slower on connecting to an IMAP server), but it can do
> newsgroups as well.

Hear hear. Lots of nice add-ons too. Although I use 'pan' for
newsreading; there's something to be said for separating the two, and not
joining the ranks of those who post emails to newsgroups! .-)

--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

Richard B. Gilbert

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 5:10:11 PM4/1/11
to

Windows XP has been obsolete for two or three years. It's no longer
supported by Microsoft. I still use it and I think I have lots of company!

If you want to port something to Windows XP, you're on your own!

OTOH, you shouldn't need a lot of support from Microsoft. XP has been
on the streets for several years now. What you build for W/2K or W/XP
*should* work on the release it was built for and any succeeding release!

Richard B. Gilbert

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 5:12:11 PM4/1/11
to

As long as I have a working Alpha, NONE!

VAXman-

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 7:46:05 PM4/1/11
to
In article <8vmqdh...@mid.individual.net>, Bob Eager <rd...@spamcop.net> writes:
>On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 21:09:07 +0200, Paul Sture wrote:
>
>> And you can bash those "apt-get install" instructions into a script
>
>'pkg_add' is equally nice on FreeBSD.

There are a number of these: pkg_add, apt-get, aptitude, yum...

It's the download tar.gz and sketchy build instructions I'd try to avoid.

Arne Vajhøj

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 8:25:28 PM4/1/11
to
On 01-04-2011 11:17, JF Mezei wrote:
> From a hobbyist point of view, I am not sure windows weenies would be
> interested in VMS. Linux or OS-X ones would.

Why not. Most people working with VMS servers will have a Windows PC to
work on.

> From a business point of view, since servers are going Linux instead of
> Windows, having a linux server act as a host for VMS would make more sense.

For a server running something: yes.

For development: not necessarily.

Arne

Arne Vajhøj

unread,
Apr 1, 2011, 9:03:14 PM4/1/11
to

There are also other products - you can run VMWare on Linux.

Arne

artem

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 5:11:50 AM4/2/11
to rgilb...@comcast.net
It is of course possible to support XP and run the same code on XP, Vista and 7. There is a choice between running on XP or using some useful Vista/W7 specific extensions. I have chosen the second thinking that XP is obsolete.

VAXman-

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 8:42:23 AM4/2/11
to
In article <4d966cf5$0$23765$1472...@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <ar...@vajhoej.dk> writes:
>On 01-04-2011 11:17, JF Mezei wrote:
>> From a hobbyist point of view, I am not sure windows weenies would be
>> interested in VMS. Linux or OS-X ones would.
>
>Why not. Most people working with VMS servers will have a Windows PC to
>work on.

WEENDOZE? Never had it; never will.

Perhaps, the key word here is "free." That's a concept devoid of meaning
to lawyers and Micro$haft. Who wants to outlay money for buggy software
from Micro$haft and for myriad headaches remedies as a result of using it
to run a free Alpha emulator? Not me!!!

And, _IF_ I were looking to run an Alpha emulation for something serious,
I'd want to run it on a server -- a linux server where I'd be able to trim
away its unnecessary OS appendages would be my choice; not the bloatwarez
WEENDOZE gaming console with its requisite utilities like Minesweeper and
Solitaire.

BillPedersen

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 8:03:09 AM4/2/11
to
On Apr 2, 5:11 am, artem <brakozi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is of course possible to support XP and run the same code on XP, Vista and 7. There is a choice between running on XP or using some useful Vista/W7 specific extensions. I have chosen the second thinking that XP is obsolete.

I think you might want to gather some statistics here.

Using Google Analytics as a mechanism for instance I can tell you that
for some small websites I manage, both technical and retail in content
Windows makes up between 80% and 90% of the traffic coming to those
sites and XP makes up between 50% and 60% of the Windows traffic.

To say it is "obsolete" is one thing.

To ignore its level of use in the market place is another.

Now, one would argue that the XP percentage will continue to drop.
And yes, it will but it is a sizable enough percentage still that you
would probably want to reconsider some of your initial design
decisions to at least get exposure.

Good luck with your project.

Bill.

Paul Sture

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 8:49:18 AM4/2/11
to
On 1 Apr 2011 20:21:05 GMT
Bob Eager <rd...@spamcop.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 21:09:07 +0200, Paul Sture wrote:
>
> > And you can bash those "apt-get install" instructions into a script
>
> 'pkg_add' is equally nice on FreeBSD.

Have VMware Workstation. It's just a download away ;-)

And it makes sense since that is what my hosting ISP runs. I need to
grab bsdtar to unpack .tar.gz files from that.

> > P.S. A vote for claws-mail here. It looks very like Apple Mail
> > (caveat it's somewhat slower on connecting to an IMAP server), but
> > it can do newsgroups as well.
>
> Hear hear. Lots of nice add-ons too. Although I use 'pan' for
> newsreading; there's something to be said for separating the two, and
> not joining the ranks of those who post emails to newsgroups! .-)
>

Unfortunately 'pan' is one of the offenders in the AM/PM area. Over 30
years of computer experience here and it drives me nuts. There's an
I/O stats package (sysstat) which does the same. Aaargh

(actually for pan this was reported as fixed about a decade ago, but it
got a rewrite into C++. I did look at the source, but someone else
has obviously run around in circles before in the relevant bit of
code. Life is too short.)

Paul Sture

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 8:55:42 AM4/2/11
to
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 23:46:05 GMT
VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

> In article <8vmqdh...@mid.individual.net>, Bob Eager
> <rd...@spamcop.net> writes:
> >On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 21:09:07 +0200, Paul Sture wrote:
> >
> >> And you can bash those "apt-get install" instructions into a script
> >
> >'pkg_add' is equally nice on FreeBSD.
>
> There are a number of these: pkg_add, apt-get, aptitude, yum...
>
> It's the download tar.gz and sketchy build instructions I'd try to
> avoid.
>

Surprisingly this is where Linux beats OS X. Yes, there is macports,
but it can take hours on my kit. It will cheerfully download and
recompile things like zlib, gettext* et al, even though the package I
downloaded the day before brought those down already.

* As John Malmberg commented when he did the gnv port, gettext is HUGE.

Paul Sture

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 8:59:59 AM4/2/11
to

I tried it on Ubuntu and got truly lousy performance when doing heavy
I/O. Since then a new release of VMware has appeared and it
officially supports Ubuntu 10.10, so that may make a difference.

Paul Sture

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 9:22:41 AM4/2/11
to
On Sat, 2 Apr 2011 05:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
BillPedersen <pede...@ccsscorp.com> wrote:

> I think you might want to gather some statistics here.
>
> Using Google Analytics as a mechanism for instance I can tell you that
> for some small websites I manage, both technical and retail in content
> Windows makes up between 80% and 90% of the traffic coming to those
> sites and XP makes up between 50% and 60% of the Windows traffic.

I do hope that you are filtering various bots out of those statistics,
since many of them claim to be running various versions of Windows.

> To say it is "obsolete" is one thing.
>
> To ignore its level of use in the market place is another.
>
> Now, one would argue that the XP percentage will continue to drop.
> And yes, it will but it is a sizable enough percentage still that you
> would probably want to reconsider some of your initial design
> decisions to at least get exposure.

There are probably a lot of corporates who will still be running XP for
quite a while yet, and these very corporates could be part of this
product's target market.

> Good luck with your project.

Ditto. Good luck!

Michael Unger

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 12:18:05 PM4/2/11
to
On 2011-04-02 14:03, "BillPedersen" wrote:

> On Apr 2, 5:11 am, artem <brakozi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It is of course possible to support XP and run the same code on XP, Vista and 7. There is a choice between running on XP or using some useful Vista/W7 specific extensions. I have chosen the second thinking that XP is obsolete.
>
> I think you might want to gather some statistics here.
>
> Using Google Analytics as a mechanism for instance I can tell you that
> for some small websites I manage, both technical and retail in content
> Windows makes up between 80% and 90% of the traffic coming to those
> sites and XP makes up between 50% and 60% of the Windows traffic.

AFAIK Google Analytics is based on JavaScript, so browsers either not
supporting JS at all or users having disabled JS on purpose can not be
counted. It seems to be quite popular for users running Windows systems
to set the security to "wide open".

> [...]

Michael, still running WinXP ...

--
Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers.
My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.

JF Mezei

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 3:07:41 PM4/2/11
to
Paul Sture wrote:

> Surprisingly this is where Linux beats OS X. Yes, there is macports,
> but it can take hours on my kit.

I've been told to stay away from macports.

It is, at the end of the day, faster and safer to just compile the stuff
yourself instead of using macports. Macports tries to have its onw copy
of the operatinfg system and messes with the PATH variable to break things.

Paul Sture

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 3:34:15 PM4/2/11
to
On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 15:07:41 -0400
JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Paul Sture wrote:
>
> > Surprisingly this is where Linux beats OS X. Yes, there is
> > macports, but it can take hours on my kit.
>
> I've been told to stay away from macports.
>
> It is, at the end of the day, faster and safer to just compile the
> stuff yourself instead of using macports.

Thanks JF. Working out the dependencies of all the packages can seem
never ending, but it _is_ a better way to go.

> Macports tries to have its onw copy of the operatinfg system and
> messes with the PATH variable to break things.

I blew fink away circa 2005 for exactly those reasons.

JF Mezei

unread,
Apr 2, 2011, 6:42:50 PM4/2/11
to
Paul Sture wrote:

> Thanks JF. Working out the dependencies of all the packages can seem
> never ending, but it _is_ a better way to go.


As an example: installing the "real" wireshark on OS-X is much faster
than installing it via macports because macports wants to duplicate much
of the stuff that is already on OS-X.

And if you ever try to install something that isn't macport, you risk
not even compiling properly (for instance, installing ghostscript from
source, which I did so I could patch the la75 output).

Paul Sture

unread,
Apr 3, 2011, 11:42:52 AM4/3/11
to

Thanks for the warning. I haven't come across that one to date, but
it's something to be aware of.

Bob Koehler

unread,
Apr 4, 2011, 9:39:15 AM4/4/11
to

The only systems we have running 7 shipped with it. It's not yet
widely adapted anywhere I know of. Everyone is still runnning XP.
Microsoft be damned.

BillPedersen

unread,
Apr 4, 2011, 10:36:03 AM4/4/11
to
On Apr 4, 9:39 am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob
Koehler) wrote:

> In article <ebea6686-79fa-438a-a95f-d428a88b8...@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>, artem <brakozi...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > It is of course possible to support XP and run the same code on XP, Vista
> >and 7. There is a choice between running on XP or using some useful Vista/W7
> >specific extensions. I have chosen the second thinking that XP is obsolete.
>
>    The only systems we have running 7 shipped with it.  It's not yet
>    widely adapted anywhere I know of.  Everyone is still runnning XP.
>    Microsoft be damned.

Can not be that "obsolete" if M$ is offering a "very nice" XP
Compatibility Mode" as a download for W7. Used it along with set up
virtual system on my new desktop/side system to give Linux and XP
development environments.

There may be some confusion as W2K has been unsupported for some time
and users with XP SP2 lost support last July, but XP SP3 is still
supported by M$.

Richard B. Gilbert

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 3:55:40 PM4/5/11
to

Well said! W/XP has been running for years on my system. It works
which is more than can be said for most of its predecessors! I won't
upgrade until circumstances force me to. It has been years since I last
saw the "Blue Screen of Death" and I like it that way!

Bob Koehler

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 5:03:24 PM4/5/11
to
In article <sPKdnSRRGMsl7gbQ...@giganews.com>, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilb...@comcast.net> writes:
>
> Well said! W/XP has been running for years on my system. It works
> which is more than can be said for most of its predecessors! I won't
> upgrade until circumstances force me to. It has been years since I last
> saw the "Blue Screen of Death" and I like it that way!

Well, I don't know which Windows they are using, but I saw a BSOD
just last week on a Shell station's video display over the pump.

Jan-Erik Soderholm

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 5:56:30 PM4/5/11
to
Richard B. Gilbert wrote 2011-04-05 21:55:
> On 4/4/2011 9:39 AM, Bob Koehler wrote:
>> In
>> article<ebea6686-79fa-438a...@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>,
>> artem<brako...@gmail.com> writes:
>>> It is of course possible to support XP and run the same code on XP, Vista
>>> and 7. There is a choice between running on XP or using some useful
>>> Vista/W7
>>> specific extensions. I have chosen the second thinking that XP is obsolete.
>>
>> The only systems we have running 7 shipped with it. It's not yet
>> widely adapted anywhere I know of.

Says more about what you "know of" then anything else.

>> Everyone is still runnning XP.
>> Microsoft be damned.
>>
>
> Well said!

Silly, I'd say.

> W/XP has been running for years on my system. It works which is
> more than can be said for most of its predecessors!

In a few years W7 will have been running for years on my current laptop.
And before that WinXP had been running for years on my previous laptop.
So what ?

And what has the predecessors to WinXP to do with W7 !?
Every sold PC for about a half to a year back was shipped with W7.
And since half a year back, WinXP isn't even shipped as an option.
And many/most PC's are replaced withing 3-4 years anyway...


John Wallace

unread,
Apr 5, 2011, 7:18:08 PM4/5/11
to
On Apr 5, 10:56 pm, Jan-Erik Soderholm <jan-erik.soderh...@telia.com>
wrote:

> Richard B. Gilbert wrote 2011-04-05 21:55:
>
> > On 4/4/2011 9:39 AM, Bob Koehler wrote:
> >> In
> >> article<ebea6686-79fa-438a-a95f-d428a88b8...@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>,

> >> artem<brakozi...@gmail.com> writes:
> >>> It is of course possible to support XP and run the same code on XP, Vista
> >>> and 7. There is a choice between running on XP or using some useful
> >>> Vista/W7
> >>> specific extensions. I have chosen the second thinking that XP is obsolete.
>
> >> The only systems we have running 7 shipped with it. It's not yet
> >> widely adapted anywhere I know of.
>
> Says more about what you "know of" then anything else.
>
> >> Everyone is still runnning XP.
> >> Microsoft be damned.
>
> > Well said!
>
> Silly, I'd say.
>
> > W/XP has been running for years on my system. It works which is
> > more than can be said for most of its predecessors!
>
> In a few years W7 will have been running for years on my current laptop.
> And before that WinXP had been running for years on my previous laptop.
> So what ?
>
> And what has the predecessors to WinXP to do with W7 !?
> Every sold PC for about a half to a year back was shipped with W7.
> And since half a year back, WinXP isn't even shipped as an option.
> And many/most PC's are replaced withing 3-4 years anyway...

Windows 7 as non-negotiable factory-installed OS may apply to the high
street PC market and to low volume users, but the corporate market
(where the VMS users used to be) is a different thing (as is the
"embedded" market in things like cash tills, fuel pumps, medical
instruments, testgear, automation equipment, etc).

In the corporate and embedded markets, nobody gives a monkeys what's
being shipped by default from the factory, because new kit gets
(re-)imaged with the local standard build before it's deployed.
Afaict, Vista hardly existed in the corporate or embedded markets, and
I personally haven't seen much sign that W7 is catching on any faster.

All a bit academic anyway because I assume the target hardware for a
typical Alpha emulator is eventually a server box, where Windows XP
was never relevant; they'd be running Windows Server 2003 or to a
lesser extent Windows 2008, maybe. Or for customers with clue, some
suitably customised and hardened flavour of Linux. But I'd be rather
interested in what kind of business logic leads to Windows 7 as a host
OS for an Alpha emulator, except for anything other than a short term
trial.

Tom Wade

unread,
Apr 6, 2011, 6:38:38 AM4/6/11
to

> If you wanted to attract as much people as possible to a product, on which system would you choose to release first?

Speaking purely as someone who has extensive VMS knowledge, a little Windows ability and *zero*
knowledge of (or wish to know about) MACs or (especially) Unix systems, my ideal emulator would look
like this:

It is shipped as a CD image, which I can burn. I then take an old PC with no operating system on
it, and boot it from this image. The image sets up a partition on the hard drive and loads itself
onto it, leaving the rest of the disk available for VMS to use. When I reboot the PC from this new
partition, it comes up with the ">>> " prompt, and it is then up to me to load a VMS CD and install
it on the other partition, and set the appropriate console variables to boot VMS.

I don't care what operating system it has been developed on, as long as it ships with the product,
and I don't have to see or maintain it (I imagine for licensing reasons it will be some free variant
of Unix in single-application mode that boots and runs the emulator).

That way it transparently makes a cheap PC without and Windows (or other) license appear to be a VAX
(or Alpha). I would also imagine the host operating system would be just enough to run the
emulator, and therefore would offer minimal overhead, as opposed to one that requires extensive
'hardening'.

Now *that* would be a very interesting way to run an emulator. Otherwise, I would prefer to get a
real alpha.

Tom Wade

John Wallace

unread,
Apr 6, 2011, 7:45:08 AM4/6/11
to

Very reasonable request. What you describe can be provided by a "Linux
Live CD" which includes a basic bootable Linux and some appropriately
minimal subset of tools as needed to manage the OS and the emulator,
and in your particular case an installation procedure to install the
required data to the local hard drive rather than the booted CD (or
USB stick or whatever).

Putting to one side the "local install" part, there are many of these
Live Linux things which exist already. I haven't built one myself
(yet) but I am told it's not that difficult to do, and I can confirm
from personal experience of various flavours of them that on any
reasonably recent PC they are not difficult for users to use. They
vary from trial version of a full Linux to various application-
specific things such as "gparted" (a partition editor on a bootable
disk, which will move, resize, whatever, various kinds of disk
partition).

So, it should hopefully be relatively simple for someone with the
relevant skills to build the generic bit, and probably not that
difficult for someone to do the "copy (hidden) OS and emulator to
local hard drive".

Or it could be relatively simple, IFF these emulators were built for
Linux as well as (instead of?) Window boxes.

There must be something missing from this picture.

VAXman-

unread,
Apr 6, 2011, 9:20:21 AM4/6/11
to
In article <4972a462-e864-455b...@f2g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>, John Wallace <johnwa...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>On Apr 6, 11:38=A0am, Tom Wade <nos...@tomwade.eu> wrote:
>> > If you wanted to attract as much people as possible to a product, on wh=

>ich system would you choose to release first?
>>
>> Speaking purely as someone who has extensive VMS knowledge, a little Wind=
>ows ability and *zero*
>> knowledge of (or wish to know about) MACs or (especially) Unix systems, m=

>y ideal emulator would look
>> like this:
>>
>> It is shipped as a CD image, which I can burn. =A0I then take an old PC w=

>ith no operating system on
>> it, and boot it from this image. =A0The image sets up a partition on the =

>hard drive and loads itself
>> onto it, leaving the rest of the disk available for VMS to use. =A0When I=

> reboot the PC from this new
>> partition, it comes up with the ">>> " prompt, and it is then up to me to=

> load a VMS CD and install
>> it on the other partition, and set the appropriate console variables to b=
>oot VMS.
>>
>> I don't care what operating system it has been developed on, as long as i=

>t ships with the product,
>> and I don't have to see or maintain it (I imagine for licensing reasons i=

>t will be some free variant
>> of Unix in single-application mode that boots and runs the emulator).
>>
>> That way it transparently makes a cheap PC without and Windows (or other)=

> license appear to be a VAX
>> (or Alpha). =A0I would also imagine the host operating system would be ju=

>st enough to run the
>> emulator, and therefore would offer minimal overhead, as opposed to one t=

>hat requires extensive
>> 'hardening'.
>>
>> Now *that* would be a very interesting way to run an emulator. =A0Otherwi=

>se, I would prefer to get a
>> real alpha.
>>
>> Tom Wade
>
>Very reasonable request. What you describe can be provided by a "Linux
>Live CD" which includes a basic bootable Linux and some appropriately
>minimal subset of tools as needed to manage the OS and the emulator,
>and in your particular case an installation procedure to install the
>required data to the local hard drive rather than the booted CD (or
>USB stick or whatever).
>
>Putting to one side the "local install" part, there are many of these
>Live Linux things which exist already. I haven't built one myself
>(yet) but I am told it's not that difficult to do, and I can confirm
>from personal experience of various flavours of them that on any
>reasonably recent PC they are not difficult for users to use. They
>vary from trial version of a full Linux to various application-
>specific things such as "gparted" (a partition editor on a bootable
>disk, which will move, resize, whatever, various kinds of disk
>partition).
>
>So, it should hopefully be relatively simple for someone with the
>relevant skills to build the generic bit, and probably not that
>difficult for someone to do the "copy (hidden) OS and emulator to
>local hard drive".

I keep a "live" on a USB stick and a SD memory card as well as on a CD.


>Or it could be relatively simple, IFF these emulators were built for
>Linux as well as (instead of?) Window boxes.

You need a MUCH LARGER font for that IFF. ;)

I've installed SimH on linux and Mac and when it's running to emulate a
VAX, the rest of the system is nary usable. In most of the cases, these
emulators are being sold to replace aging VAX hardware. I don't believe
that such a system would also need to run Minesweeper and Solitaire! A
most reasonalble request from Tom and those developing these emulations
would be wise to heed this request.

Bob Koehler

unread,
Apr 6, 2011, 9:49:36 AM4/6/11
to
In article <ukXmp.930$K4....@news.indigo.ie>, Tom Wade <nos...@tomwade.eu> writes:
>
> I don't care what operating system it has been developed on, as long as it ships with the product,
> and I don't have to see or maintain it (I imagine for licensing reasons it will be some free variant
> of Unix in single-application mode that boots and runs the emulator).

I do care, and I think someone is working on this: an emulator that
runs on top of a stripped down real-time kernel. IIRC, I heard about
this recently, but I don't recall any details.

Michael Unger

unread,
Apr 6, 2011, 11:20:08 AM4/6/11
to

Many years ago -- perhaps at an HP "TUD" event, I don't remember -- I
talked to a local Charon-VAX reseller and asked why that emulator has
been built to run as an application on Windows. He told me that the most
significant reason was the availability of device drivers for a lot of
hardware components; otherwise the emulator had to be limited to run on
a _very_ small set of certified hardware components. Well, this has been
true for OpenVMS for quite some decades ...

But different from VAX and Alpha hardware PC components are usually
available for just a few months if at all.

Michael

John Wallace

unread,
Apr 6, 2011, 12:50:36 PM4/6/11
to
On Apr 6, 2:49 pm, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob

If you search this group for posts referencing QNX (an RT OS) you will
find some posts from almost exactly a year ago talking about how one
of the early/well-known commercial VAX emulators is available on QNX,
but in general it seems to be a well kept secret.

John Wallace

unread,
Apr 6, 2011, 12:59:30 PM4/6/11