OpenVMS vs. Tru64? - DEC

This is a discussion on OpenVMS vs. Tru64? - DEC ; In article , pechter@pcp09822625pcs.eatntn01.nj.comcast.net (Bill Pechter) writes: >{...snip...} >The stickers now come from MS with the license key. The license >requires them to be affixed to the machines now. > >Got this tidbit at an MS seminar that came along ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 61 to 78 of 78

Thread: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

  1. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    In article <3_adnWnxdeU3n0XVnZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@comcast.com>, pechter@pcp09822625pcs.eatntn01.nj.comcast.net (Bill Pechter) writes:
    >{...snip...}
    >The stickers now come from MS with the license key. The license
    >requires them to be affixed to the machines now.
    >
    >Got this tidbit at an MS seminar that came along with my MS Partner
    >stuff.


    Exactly and thanks for verifying. I wasn't pissing in the wind because
    I hate Micro$oft. This has been part of their license requirements for
    some time.


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

    .... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)

    Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    notice, disclaimer and quotations.

  2. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    In article <00A8005C.9B2492F4@sendspamhere.org>,
    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:
    > In article <3_adnWnxdeU3n0XVnZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@comcast.com>, pechter@pcp09822625pcs.eatntn01.nj.comcast.net (Bill Pechter) writes:
    >>{...snip...}
    >>The stickers now come from MS with the license key. The license
    >>requires them to be affixed to the machines now.
    >>
    >>Got this tidbit at an MS seminar that came along with my MS Partner
    >>stuff.

    >
    > Exactly and thanks for verifying. I wasn't pissing in the wind because
    > I hate Micro$oft. This has been part of their license requirements for
    > some time.


    MSDNAA Key come over the INTERNET. Somehow I don't see how stickers
    are going to pop out of the screen along with them. Guess it depends
    on how you license the product.

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  3. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 20:40:10 UTC,
    pechter@pcp09822625pcs.eatntn01.nj.comcast.net (Bill Pechter) wrote:

    > The stickers now come from MS with the license key. The license
    > requires them to be affixed to the machines now.
    >
    > Got this tidbit at an MS seminar that came along with my MS Partner
    > stuff.


    Indeed. I built two machines recently for my sons, and wanted to put XP
    on them. I bought two genuine copies of XP (educational price!) and they
    both came with said stickers.



  4. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    In article <6jqfi2F4esd4U1@mid.individual.net>,
    Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    >In article <00A8005C.9B2492F4@sendspamhere.org>,
    > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:
    >> In article <3_adnWnxdeU3n0XVnZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@comcast.com>,

    >pechter@pcp09822625pcs.eatntn01.nj.comcast.net (Bill Pechter) writes:
    >>>{...snip...}
    >>>The stickers now come from MS with the license key. The license
    >>>requires them to be affixed to the machines now.
    >>>
    >>>Got this tidbit at an MS seminar that came along with my MS Partner
    >>>stuff.

    >>
    >> Exactly and thanks for verifying. I wasn't pissing in the wind because
    >> I hate Micro$oft. This has been part of their license requirements for
    >> some time.

    >
    >MSDNAA Key come over the INTERNET. Somehow I don't see how stickers
    >are going to pop out of the screen along with them. Guess it depends
    >on how you license the product.
    >
    >bill
    >
    >--
    >Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    >billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    >University of Scranton |
    >Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include



    MSDN is different. It's different for not-for-resale, development only.
    The Retail and OEM stuff (aka System Builder) requires the stickers.
    The Partner pack even comes with some lineprinter'd labels with the keys
    on it to attach to the machines if you want.

    Partner licenses kind of falls between MSDN and System Builder.
    The partner stuff is NFR (not-for-resale) internal use only for
    development, training and other internal uses. It's not downloadable
    they ship quarterly CD/DVD's.

    I've been considering MSDN Academic since I'm now working on a
    University Campus as a full time employee.

    Bill

    --
    --
    Be comforted that in the face of all erridity and disallusionment, and
    despite the changing fortunes of time, there is always a big future in
    computer maintainance. --Deteriorata (pechter-at-gmail-dot-com)

  5. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    In article <6jo0s1F456tkU2@mid.individual.net>,
    billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:

    > In article <176uZD2KcidF-pn2-MF1Z8FqpOjTd@rikki.tavi.co.uk>,
    > writes:
    > > (It's not 'cryptic like UNIX' anyway. It's a one-off, once a year, for
    > > VMS and each LP one is actually using.)

    >
    > "1-KPJN-PLCO-BMEA-BFGJ" isn't cryptic?


    "Cryptic" would imply that it's a string intended to make sense.

    --
    Don't bother with piddly crap like "gun control".
    Life is 100% fatal. Ban it.

  6. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    Bill Gunshannon schrieb:

    > So,
    > anybody here have any experience with HP-UX? How is license installation
    > handled there?


    The base OS (which includes networking and GUI)
    does not have license keys, at least not from UX 9 onwards.
    I have yet to install 8 and 7 on my museum boxes, but inspection
    of the respective media indicates these version aren't codeword
    protected either.
    In fact VMS is about the only OS with those weird PAK scheme
    for the base OS.

    On HP-UX layered software (like compilers) requires a customer ID and
    codewords.
    These are as cryptic as codewords usually are, but you enter them
    using SAM, i.e. when networking and GUI are fully working.
    The difference to PAKs is, that the codeword is needed at installation
    time, not at run time. Once installed, you are "free".
    Which is the reason why codeword sheets must be kept "top secret"
    and to my knowledge sth like PAKGEN hasn't made it into the wild yet.


  7. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    In article <6jq453F4727uU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    >
    > And I was still wondering about the comment made earlier about PAKS on a
    > CD. I think I have it now. Didn't CSLG PAKS come on a CD?


    I used my Mac to transfer PAKs on a CD when I didn't have my first
    Multinet hobbyist license. While I was waiting, I wanted to install
    the compilers and rnu thier IVPs. Not a requirement, just a desire.


  8. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    In article <6jq6b2F4h2v3U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    >
    > When was that? 1970? 1971? Haven't any of the VMS fanatics here even
    > looked at their competition lately?


    Late 1980's as I recall. And since then I've done a variety more,
    including Linux 0.98 from floppies and last year's RedHat from CD.

    Had to call RedHat more than once just to get a second ATA drive
    recognised.


  9. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
    >In article <6jq6b2F4h2v3U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    >>
    >> When was that? 1970? 1971? Haven't any of the VMS fanatics here even
    >> looked at their competition lately?

    >
    > Late 1980's as I recall. And since then I've done a variety more,
    > including Linux 0.98 from floppies and last year's RedHat from CD.
    >
    > Had to call RedHat more than once just to get a second ATA drive
    > recognised.


    Ignore him. Apparently, if you post in any VMS or DEC related newsgroup,
    you are, de facto, a VMS fanatic. Bill, of course, does so too so he must
    be a VMS fanatic.

    I spend more time toting my Linux laptob with me and working on keeping a
    Linux server running throughout the day. I also spend more time on my Mac
    too but, by virtue of lurking here and in c.o.v., I am a VMS fanatic that
    has no concept of any other OS.

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

    .... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)

    Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    notice, disclaimer and quotations.

  10. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    On 22 sep, 00:17, Michael Kraemer wrote:
    > H Vlems schrieb:
    >
    >
    >
    > > Michael, not sure what caused that reaction but it is not true.
    > > Ease of installation of an OS depends on skills and experience.

    >
    > No. It does not have to do with skills.
    > When I installed my alphas, I had zero experience
    > with Tru64 and zero experience with VMS installation.
    > Same hardware, same OS vendor.
    > Tru64 went much more smoothly.
    > Leaving lacking hardware support issues aside,
    > which can be show-stoppers for VMS, but not for Tru64,
    > the license key issue is really a PITA.
    > VMS installation forces you to enter that stuff
    > at the OPA0: level. Each typo requires retyping
    > that crap. Can't use mouse and GUI because that
    > requires a PAK. Can't just fetch it because ftp
    > requires another PAK. Boy, that's weird, you must agree.
    > All that not needed for Tru64, so it wins hands down.
    >
    > (snip)
    >
    > > Every Alpha with a graphics adapter,

    >
    > provided it is supported. Tru64 supports more adapters than VMS.
    >
    > > It won't install the licenses for you

    >
    > for most OSes you don't need license keys at all.
    > Imagine that.
    > Even Tru64 can be run without, provided one is satisfied
    > with OSF-USR. It's VMS being the odd man out.
    >
    > > So, what actually is your problem

    >
    > Since so far I run Tru64 rather than VMS I don't have problems :-)
    > But I might give it another try during the Xmas break.
    >
    > > (besides obviously not being in a
    > > good mood)?

    >
    > You can't draw that conclusion just because I beg to differ
    > from your opinion.


    No, I came to that conclusion based on the way you wrote your
    comments.
    Then again, I'm prejudiced in favor of VMS in the first place (yes,
    you got that right!)
    so, rereading your mails, I guess I was too fast with that conclusion.
    My apologies.
    Which doesn''t mean I agree with you, mind you!
    First of all, VMS worls quite well from the command line and that
    works perfectly well
    without any license at all, that is from OPA0:. And since I'm old
    enough to have worked
    with VMS when it didn't even have a GUI (even before mr. Gates
    invented Windows, whatever version)
    I can manage a VMS system quite well from the command interface. And
    even with a dumb glass terminal
    (VT400 onwards) it is possible to cut and paste command procedures
    from one system to another.
    And with just a VT100 on OPA0:, SET HOST/DTE TTA1: is your friend.
    Which is what I did with my first Alpha, with only a couple of VAXes
    at hand.
    The thing is, your experience with VMS is a mirror of what happened
    when I first tried to install Tru64.
    Very troublesome, and I couldn't get the GUI started. All I could was
    connect to the console with root.
    And all I could find was lmf as a tool to install PAK's.
    May be experience (as in: used to VMS) did not exactly help me. But it
    took licenses to make Tru64 work.
    Once the GUI is up, it is clear that DEC spent more effort in Tru64
    than in VMS. But we were used to DCL anyway, right?
    Hans

  11. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    On 22 sep, 02:22, Michael Kraemer wrote:
    > Michael Unger schrieb:
    >
    > > Assuming "hobbyist licenses" (commercial licenses are usually printed
    > > sheets of paper) sent via e-mail from Montagar you *definitely* need
    > > another *running* system (whatever HW and OS) to retrieve the e-mail.

    >
    > That's definitely true, unfortunately. But is M$ really mandatory ?
    > Usually I stored the stuff as a text file "somewhere",
    > entered the UCX license manually (pfff !) and fetched the Montagar
    > script via ftp. Stone age when compared with today's standards.
    >
    > >>1)
    > >>With which one can have some additional fun since the two OSs
    > >>apparently mutually mangle their TOY entries.

    >
    > > Isn't the hardware clock simply counting "ticks"?

    >
    > On AlphaStations (at least) both OSs somehow leave their traces
    > in the clock chip. These are incompatible, so Tru64 complains
    > about "invalid time" (or sth like that) whenever VMS was booted before,
    > and probably vice versa. Not a big deal, though, but the respective
    > messages look pretty frightening at first glance (initially I was
    > looking for a bad battery to replace), and the whole thing
    > speaks volumes, IMHO, about QA and intra-company communication
    > within DEC in the mid-90s.


    If you boot Tru64 after VMS the console prints a message that it
    encountered a
    "preposterous date/time format" :-)
    I can't recal what VMS reports, but it does ask the operator to enter
    a date and time
    early on in the boot process. Like Standalone Baclup does or a system
    without a
    working battery for the TOY clock.
    Hans

  12. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    On 22 sep, 08:28, wrote:
    > On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 00:40:07 UTC, Michael Kraemer
    > wrote:
    >
    > > VAXman- schrieb:

    >
    > > > What is crypitic? *The checksum? *Well, I suppose they could havechosen
    > > > something more english-like for the checksum like Throatwarbler Mangrove
    > > > perhaps?

    >
    > > > It's not that difficult: *#-ABCD-EFGH-IJKL-MNOP 1+4*4

    >
    > > Except if you typed "0" for an "O" and you have no
    > > GUI to correct (because this would require another checksum)
    > > and you have to re-type the whole crap,
    > > not only the checksum but everything else as well.

    >
    > RTFM - which states that those four-character groups are all alphabetic.
    >
    > And you don't have to type it all again if you use VMSLICENSE.


    No, surely not.
    All you had to do is hit enter because previous entries are repeated
    as defaults when you're
    correcting your input. It took me a while to figure out that \ removed
    previously entered input.
    The checksum entry is different from the others because invalid
    characters are oarsed and
    the operator is asked to enter a string without improper characters.

  13. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    On 22 sep, 09:06, Joseph Huber wrote:
    > Michael Kraemer wrote:
    > > Michael Unger schrieb:

    >
    > >> Assuming "hobbyist licenses" (commercial licenses are usually printed
    > >> sheets of paper) sent via e-mail from Montagar you *definitely* need
    > >> another *running* system (whatever HW and OS) to retrieve the e-mail.

    >
    > > Aah, I forgot: is it any better for commercial licenses, i.e.
    > > would they come on floppy/CD so one would just have to run a
    > > script with lmf commands ?

    >
    > No, as said, commercial licenses come on paper, so You have to type them in.
    >
    > But something I never tested myself: isn't the client side of UCX (ftp
    > client) running without license key loaded, only services need them ?
    > Then it would be possible to load everything from the system where the
    > license email is stored.
    >
    > Apropos commercial licenses: here VMS is on par with MS Windows:-)
    > can You install it without typing the 30 -or so- character license key
    > on the keyboard ?
    >
    > --
    >
    > * Joseph Huber * -http://www.huber-joseph.de


    FTP won't run without a license, so that's no option.
    Basically the only networking tool you have on a VMS system without
    licenses is LAT.
    And that is useful only for outbound connections.
    Come to think of it, SYSMAN might work. CONNECT to th๋ new system and
    use the
    DO command to run a command procedure. Could be that you need a
    VMSCLUSTER license,
    never tried that myself. I have admitted to using a Windows system and
    got flogged enough as it is......

  14. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    On 23 sep, 22:14, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > In article , koeh...@eisner.nospam..encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
    >
    > >In article <6jq6b2F4h2v...@mid.individual.net>, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:

    >
    > >> When was that? *1970? *1971? *Haven't any of the VMS fanatics here even
    > >> looked at their competition lately?

    >
    > > * Late 1980's as I recall. *And since then I've done a variety more,
    > > * including Linux 0.98 from floppies and last year's RedHat from CD.

    >
    > > * Had to call RedHat more than once just to get a second ATA drive
    > > * recognised.

    >
    > Ignore him. *Apparently, if you post in any VMS or DEC related newsgroup,
    > you are, de facto, a VMS fanatic. *Bill, of course, does so too so he must
    > be a VMS fanatic.
    >
    > I spend more time toting my Linux laptob with me and working on keeping a
    > Linux server running throughout the day. *I also spend more time on my Mac
    > too but, by virtue of lurking here and in c.o.v., I am a VMS fanatic that
    > has no concept of any other OS.
    >
    > --
    > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker * * *VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    >
    > ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    > no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)
    >
    > Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. *Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    > of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    > notice, disclaimer and quotations.


    When PAK's arrived with VMS 5.0 they were a pain. Most of all because
    DEC didn't have a clue
    what we (the customer) had purchased previously.
    The advantage was that media kits no longer were strictly guarded.
    Before the PAK's arrived
    (like something out of a Larry Niven novel) if you owned a H-kit it
    was proof that you owned the product.
    Now software kits are readily available and the hobbyist program
    allows us to use more than 100 products.
    The only thing that worries me is what happens if (or when) Montagar
    stops providing them.
    Hans

  15. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    H Vlems wrote:
    > [...big snip...]
    > Come to think of it, SYSMAN might work. CONNECT to th๋ new system and
    > use the DO command to run a command procedure. Could be that you need
    > a VMSCLUSTER license, never tried that myself.


    No, you don't need a VMSCLUSTER licence to use SYSMAN.

    I make regular use of SYSMAN to manage a "compute farm" of 15 DS15's,
    none of which is clustered. Communications are over DECnet.

  16. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    In article <48d9f4b9$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, "R.A.Omond"
    writes:

    > H Vlems wrote:
    > > [...big snip...]
    > > Come to think of it, SYSMAN might work. CONNECT to th๋ new system and
    > > use the DO command to run a command procedure. Could be that you need
    > > a VMSCLUSTER license, never tried that myself.

    >
    > No, you don't need a VMSCLUSTER licence to use SYSMAN.
    >
    > I make regular use of SYSMAN to manage a "compute farm" of 15 DS15's,
    > none of which is clustered. Communications are over DECnet.


    In that case, you need a DECnet license.

    My case is reversed: I use SYSMAN in a cluster, but no DECnet is
    running. Presumably, it uses cluster communication within the cluster
    (even if DECnet is there) and DECnet outside of it.


  17. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    In article , helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:
    >In article <48d9f4b9$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, "R.A.Omond"
    > writes:
    >
    >> H Vlems wrote:
    >> > [...big snip...]
    >> > Come to think of it, SYSMAN might work. CONNECT to th๋ new system and
    >> > use the DO command to run a command procedure. Could be that you need
    >> > a VMSCLUSTER license, never tried that myself.

    >>
    >> No, you don't need a VMSCLUSTER licence to use SYSMAN.
    >>
    >> I make regular use of SYSMAN to manage a "compute farm" of 15 DS15's,
    >> none of which is clustered. Communications are over DECnet.

    >
    >In that case, you need a DECnet license.
    >
    >My case is reversed: I use SYSMAN in a cluster, but no DECnet is
    >running. Presumably, it uses cluster communication within the cluster
    >(even if DECnet is there) and DECnet outside of it.


    Not presumably. SMI services in SYS$SHARE:SMI$SHR.EXE are used. This
    RTL provides a higher level interface to some SYSAPs which communicate
    between cluster members. No DECnet is involved.

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

    .... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)

    Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    notice, disclaimer and quotations.

  18. Re: OpenVMS vs. Tru64?

    On 24 sep, 13:53, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > In article , hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > >In article <48d9f4b9$0$90272$14726...@news.sunsite.dk>, "R.A.Omond"
    > > writes:

    >
    > >> H Vlems wrote:
    > >> *> [...big snip...]
    > >> *> Come to think of it, SYSMAN might work. CONNECT to th๋ new system and
    > >> *> use the DO command to run a command procedure. Could be that you need
    > >> *> a VMSCLUSTER license, never tried that myself.

    >
    > >> No, you don't need a VMSCLUSTER licence to use SYSMAN.

    >
    > >> I make regular use of SYSMAN to manage a "compute farm" of 15 DS15's,
    > >> none of which is clustered. *Communications are over DECnet.

    >
    > >In that case, you need a DECnet license.

    >
    > >My case is reversed: I use SYSMAN in a cluster, but no DECnet is
    > >running. *Presumably, it uses cluster communication within the cluster
    > >(even if DECnet is there) and DECnet outside of it.

    >
    > Not presumably. *SMI services in SYS$SHARE:SMI$SHR.EXE are used. *This
    > RTL provides a higher level interface to some SYSAPs which communicate
    > between cluster members. *No DECnet is involved.
    >
    > --
    > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker * * *VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    >
    > ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    > no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)
    >
    > Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. *Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    > of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    > notice, disclaimer and quotations.- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht nietweergeven -
    >
    > - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -


    Which is why I thought of using SYSMAN.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4