On Sep 19, 3:27*pm, AndersonBill wrote:
> I have an XP1000 with no operating system. I have no definite plans
> for the machine, simply to fool around, test box, statistics, GIS,
> mostly with graphic desktop.
>
> Sorry for such a basic question, but is Tru64 still available, or does
> OpenVMS have X-server capabilities?
>
> I realize there are Alpha Linux distros available, but would like to
> keep to the original software if possible.
>
> Thank you for your help,
> Bill

VMS (on Alpha, VMS/VAX has an entirely different look and feel) has a
GUI that runs on top of Motif.
The initial login screens of Tru64 and VMS are different.
VMS presents a white panel with "Username" and "Password" in it, Tru64
shows two separate screens,
with the HP logo on them. The functionality is the same and once
you're in; a very similar look and feel.
I run Tru64 on an Alpha Server 800 5/500 and VMS on an XP1000 (among
others).
The XP1000 has the advantage of a more powerful cpu and IDE (large,
fairly cheap disks).
There used to be a Tru64 hobbyist program; no idea whether it still
exists. IIRC the cost for a license
was $100. Montagar runs the VMS hobbyist site and if you have a Decus
or Encompass membership
you can obtain the licenses for free. A media cd for VMS and several
layered products is $30.
I'm biased if not prejudiced in favor of VMS but even then I think
it's fair to say that hobbyist use of VMS
is a lot easier and cheaper than running Tru64 at home.
Hans Vlems

On 2008-09-19 16:57, "H Vlems" wrote:

> [...]
> There used to be a Tru64 hobbyist program; no idea whether it still
> exists. IIRC the cost for a license
> was $100. Montagar runs the VMS hobbyist site and if you have a Decus
> or Encompass membership
> you can obtain the licenses for free. A media cd for VMS and several
> layered products is $30.

According to Warren Sander of HP [1] "the noncommercial-unix program got
canceled".

> [...]

Michael


[1] comp.os.vms, Msg-ID <455b8168$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>, 15-Nov-2006

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My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.

In article <8bc6c09e-b325-4c04-bd6d-e337172dea9d@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, AndersonBill writes:
> Sorry for such a basic question, but is Tru64 still available, or does
> OpenVMS have X-server capabilities?

IIRC, the Tru64 hobbyist program has been shut down, but you can
still buy it commercially from HP.

VMS definitely has X-server capabilities. Check the SPD and the
FAQ for which graphics cards are supported, or work anyhow.

In article <66d5ae45-ce3b-4a8c-90ad-70646cec018a@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>, H Vlems writes:
>
> VMS (on Alpha, VMS/VAX has an entirely different look and feel) has a
> GUI that runs on top of Motif.

Not if both are running CDE. Mine don't just because I'm no fan of CDE.

H Vlems schrieb:
> I'm biased if not prejudiced in favor of VMS but even then I think
> it's fair to say that hobbyist use of VMS
> is a lot easier and cheaper than running Tru64 at home.

The opposite is true, IMHO.
Tru64 support for alphas is better than VMS
(some graphic cards and IDE CD-ROMs come to mind).
Installation is a lot easier:
insert the CD and off you go, with the builtin OSF-USR
PAK you can run root with GUI and everything seamlessly,
no need to enter silly checksums in the first place.
The non-commercial OSF-BASE license you need for
multiuser operation, but you don't have to renew it.
Tru64 is Unix, which means you can compile freeware
from the Linux pool relatively easy.
Disadvantage: it's dead. But so is alpha.

On 19 sep, 20:48, Michael Kraemer wrote:
> H Vlems schrieb:
>
> > I'm biased if not prejudiced in favor of VMS but even then I think
> > it's fair to say that hobbyist use of VMS
> > is a lot easier and cheaper than running Tru64 at home.
>
> The opposite is true, IMHO.
> Tru64 support for alphas is better than VMS
> (some graphic cards and IDE CD-ROMs come to mind).
> Installation is a lot easier:
> insert the CD and off you go, with the builtin OSF-USR
> PAK you can run root with GUI and everything seamlessly,
> no need to enter silly checksums in the first place.
> The non-commercial OSF-BASE license you need for
> multiuser operation, but you don't have to renew it.
> Tru64 is Unix, which means you can compile freeware
> from the Linux pool relatively easy.
> Disadvantage: it's dead. But so is alpha.

Michael, your reasoning is quite sound, but really depends on
experience.
Installing VMS is dead simple, can do it in my sleep and installing
licenses
is no trouble at all because the Montagar licenses install themselves
since they come
in the form of a DCL script. OTOH even though I have quite some
experience installing
Linux and Ultrix-32 it took me several attempts to get Tru64 V5.0
running with DECnet and IP.
So the installation process of Tru64 proved to be a real pain while
Linux is easy and VMS routine.
Reason: Tru64 installations < 5, Linux approx. 40 and VMS >> 300 (I
guess).
And I'm still looking for DECnet phase IV for Tru64 (if it exists at
all) :-(
YMMV !
Hans

H Vlems schrieb:

>
> Michael, your reasoning is quite sound, but really depends on
> experience.
> Installing VMS is dead simple, can do it in my sleep and installing
> licenses
> is no trouble at all because the Montagar licenses install themselves
> since they come
> in the form of a DCL script.

Yes, but to get it onto the machine, you need sth like ftp.
Which is secured by a PAK, at least until version 7.x.
Kind of a hen-and-egg situation.

> OTOH even though I have quite some
> experience installing
> Linux and Ultrix-32 it took me several attempts to get Tru64 V5.0
> running with DECnet and IP.

DECnet is special of course.
IP was no problem, the menu-guided installation
I found to be rather painless.

> So the installation process of Tru64 proved to be a real pain while
> Linux is easy and VMS routine.
> Reason: Tru64 installations < 5, Linux approx. 40 and VMS >> 300 (I
> guess).
> And I'm still looking for DECnet phase IV for Tru64 (if it exists at
> all) :-(

DECnet plus can be found on various SPL CDs,
but this you probably know.
According to my catalog there's a "DECnet/OSI" for 4.0C at least,
don't know if it helps, I know almost nothing about DECnet.

> YMMV !
> Hans

On 2008-09-20 01:40, "Michael Kraemer" wrote:

> H Vlems schrieb:
>
>> Michael, your reasoning is quite sound, but really depends on
>> experience.
>> Installing VMS is dead simple, can do it in my sleep and installing
>> licenses
>> is no trouble at all because the Montagar licenses install themselves
>> since they come
>> in the form of a DCL script.
>
> Yes, but to get it onto the machine, you need sth like ftp.
> Which is secured by a PAK, at least until version 7.x.
> Kind of a hen-and-egg situation.

Not really ...

Establish a PuTTY terminal session from a PC to the console port, invoke
an editor, and cut'n'paste Montagar's license procedure into the
editor's window. (At least for the base and UCX/TCP-IP-Services licenses.)

> [...]

Michael

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

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:40:59 UTC, Michael Kraemer
wrote:

> H Vlems schrieb:
> >
> > Michael, your reasoning is quite sound, but really depends on
> > experience.
> > Installing VMS is dead simple, can do it in my sleep and installing
> > licenses
> > is no trouble at all because the Montagar licenses install themselves
> > since they come
> > in the form of a DCL script.
>
> Yes, but to get it onto the machine, you need sth like ftp.
> Which is secured by a PAK, at least until version 7.x.
> Kind of a hen-and-egg situation.

Except that a CD works pretty well.

On Sep 20, 1:40*am, Michael Kraemer wrote:
> H Vlems schrieb:
>
>
>
> > Michael, your reasoning is quite sound, but really depends on
> > experience.
> > Installing VMS is dead simple, can do it in my sleep and installing
> > licenses
> > is no trouble at all because the Montagar licenses install themselves
> > since they come
> > in the form of a DCL script.
>
> Yes, but to get it onto the machine, you need sth like ftp.
> Which is secured by a PAK, at least until version 7.x.
> Kind of a hen-and-egg situation.
>

That is one way of doing it, but it is also possible to store the
Montagar
PAK's on a PC or another VMS system and cut-and-paste contencts from
one
terminal emulator window to another. All systems have a serial port
and LAT runs
without a license. An RX23 floppy or CD works as well.

>
> > OTOH even though I have quite some
> > experience installing
> > Linux and Ultrix-32 it took me several attempts to get Tru64 V5.0
> > running with DECnet and IP.
>
> DECnet is special of course.
> IP was no problem, the menu-guided installation
> I found to be rather painless.

Configuring IP on a unix system is basically not difficult but is done
differently.

>
> > So the installation process of Tru64 proved to be a real pain while
> > Linux is easy and VMS routine.
> > Reason: Tru64 installations < 5, Linux approx. 40 and VMS >> 300 (I
> > guess).
> > And I'm still looking for DECnet phase IV for Tru64 (if it exists at
> > all) :-(
>
> DECnet plus can be found on various SPL CDs,
> but this you probably know.
> According to my catalog there's a "DECnet/OSI" for 4.0C at least,
> don't know if it helps, I know almost nothing about DECnet.
>
> > YMMV !
> > Hans

I run DECnet plus (or phase V) on the Tru64 5.0 system. Although I
like
DECnet plus for its configuration flexibility and the way it is
designed, it
is also a lot more difficult to remember all the layer-specific
commands.
So at home I run phase IV, and I'd rather have that on Tru64 as well.
But I don't know whether it even exists.

Hans

In article <6jjrg0F3l6g9U1@mid.individual.net>,
Michael Unger writes:
> On 2008-09-20 01:40, "Michael Kraemer" wrote:
>
>> H Vlems schrieb:
>>
>>> Michael, your reasoning is quite sound, but really depends on
>>> experience.
>>> Installing VMS is dead simple, can do it in my sleep and installing
>>> licenses
>>> is no trouble at all because the Montagar licenses install themselves
>>> since they come
>>> in the form of a DCL script.
>>
>> Yes, but to get it onto the machine, you need sth like ftp.
>> Which is secured by a PAK, at least until version 7.x.
>> Kind of a hen-and-egg situation.
>
> Not really ...
>
> Establish a PuTTY terminal session from a PC to the console port, invoke
> an editor, and cut'n'paste Montagar's license procedure into the
> editor's window. (At least for the base and UCX/TCP-IP-Services licenses.)

Blasphemy!! He shouldn't have a PC connected to the console. It should
be an LA or VT Terminal.

Of course, it is interesting that people here talk about how easy VMSX is
to install and that Windows is such a piece of crap and then tell someone
they need a box running Windows in order to get their VMS system running!!

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

On 2008-09-20 15:13, "Bill Gunshannon" wrote:

> [...]
>
> Of course, it is interesting that people here talk about how easy VMSX is
> to install and that Windows is such a piece of crap and then tell someone
> they need a box running Windows in order to get their VMS system running!!

There is no need to run Windows at all -- take your favourite flavour of
Linux, *BSD, Solaris, ...

Michael

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

On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:30:31 UTC, Michael Unger
wrote:

> On 2008-09-20 15:13, "Bill Gunshannon" wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > Of course, it is interesting that people here talk about how easy VMSX is
> > to install and that Windows is such a piece of crap and then tell someone
> > they need a box running Windows in order to get their VMS system running!!
>
> There is no need to run Windows at all -- take your favourite flavour of
> Linux, *BSD, Solaris, ...

I tend to use an ancient IBM plasma screen 'portable' - and DOS.

On Sep 20, 3:13*pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
> In article <6jjrg0F3l6g...@mid.individual.net>,
> * * * * Michael Unger writes:
>
>
>
> > On 2008-09-20 01:40, "Michael Kraemer" wrote:
>
> >> H Vlems schrieb:
>
> >>> Michael, your reasoning is quite sound, but really depends on
> >>> experience.
> >>> Installing VMS is dead simple, can do it in my sleep and installing
> >>> licenses
> >>> is no trouble at all because the Montagar licenses install themselves
> >>> since they come
> >>> in the form of a DCL script.
>
> >> Yes, but to get it onto the machine, you need sth like ftp.
> >> Which is secured by a PAK, at least until version 7.x.
> >> Kind of a hen-and-egg situation.
>
> > Not really ...
>
> > Establish a PuTTY terminal session from a PC to the console port, invoke
> > an editor, and cut'n'paste Montagar's license procedure into the
> > editor's window. (At least for the base and UCX/TCP-IP-Services licenses.)
>
> Blasphemy!! *He shouldn't have a PC connected to the console. *It should
> be an LA or VT Terminal. *
>
> Of course, it is interesting that people here talk about how easy VMSX is
> to install and that Windows is such a piece of crap and then tell someone
> they need a box running Windows in order to get their VMS system running!!
>
> bill
>
> --
> Bill Gunshannon * * * * *| *de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. *Three wolves
> billg...@cs.scranton.edu | *and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
> University of Scranton * |
> Scranton, Pennsylvania * | * * * * #include *

Bill,
running Windows XP on a PC with 8 or 10 serial interfaces is a lot
easier on the power bill than separate consoles.
Linux might be an alternative but I find Reflection X very easy to
use.
Other than that, blasphemy is not too far off I guess....
Hans

Bill Gunshannon schrieb:

>
> Blasphemy!! He shouldn't have a PC connected to the console. It should
> be an LA or VT Terminal.
>
> Of course, it is interesting that people here talk about how easy VMSX is
> to install and that Windows is such a piece of crap and then tell someone
> they need a box running Windows in order to get their VMS system running!!

This is exactly my point.
People keep telling me how superior VMS is over everything
else, but I'd need a lame PC to get it up and running.
Basically this means that VMS can't even stand on its own feet
anymore.
I could remotely understand this for a server,
but for a workstation like the XP1000, which is sort
of the alpha desktops last hooray, it is indeed sheer blasphemy.
One should take a look at other platforms: AIX, HP-UX, Solaris,
even Tru64 and Ultrix: no need for steenking PC to install
the respective workstations. It's only the machine, the CD set
and me to get them up and running. On a scale which measures
ease of installation until GUI and networking is running,
VMS takes the absolute bottom notch, IMHO.

In article <6jkh28F3m56qU1@mid.individual.net>,
Michael Unger writes:
> On 2008-09-20 15:13, "Bill Gunshannon" wrote:
>
>> [...]
>>
>> Of course, it is interesting that people here talk about how easy VMSX is
>> to install and that Windows is such a piece of crap and then tell someone
>> they need a box running Windows in order to get their VMS system running!!
>
> There is no need to run Windows at all -- take your favourite flavour of
> Linux, *BSD, Solaris, ...


Anything but VMS? You do realize that no other OS requires you to
have a second, different OS in order to reasonably install their 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

Michael Kraemer schrieb:
> Bill Gunshannon schrieb:
>
>>
>> Blasphemy!! He shouldn't have a PC connected to the console. It should
>> be an LA or VT Terminal.
>> Of course, it is interesting that people here talk about how easy VMSX is
>> to install and that Windows is such a piece of crap and then tell someone
>> they need a box running Windows in order to get their VMS system
>> running!!
>
> This is exactly my point.
> People keep telling me how superior VMS is over everything
> else, but I'd need a lame PC to get it up and running.
> Basically this means that VMS can't even stand on its own feet
> anymore.
> I could remotely understand this for a server,
> but for a workstation like the XP1000, which is sort
> of the alpha desktops last hooray, it is indeed sheer blasphemy.
> One should take a look at other platforms: AIX, HP-UX, Solaris,
> even Tru64 and Ultrix: no need for steenking PC to install
> the respective workstations. It's only the machine, the CD set
> and me to get them up and running. On a scale which measures
> ease of installation until GUI and networking is running,
> VMS takes the absolute bottom notch, IMHO.
>

That's complete nonsense, for an Alpha workstation it also doesn't need
more than the machine, the (single) CD, and me to install VMS.
The whole discussion started with the question how to avoid typing in
the license data for the network stack 'by hand'.
The system using for cut/paste of the license data can as well be any
other VMS system, no need for alien systems.
The whole question of licenses for hobbyist systems is annoying, Yes,
but does not make it impossible to install VMS on a workstation without
the help of another system!

--

Joseph Huber - http://www.huber-joseph.de

"Bill Gunshannon" wrote in message
news:6jkqjoF3ode5U1@mid.individual.net...
>
> Anything but VMS? You do realize that no other OS requires you to
> have a second, different OS in order to reasonably install their 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


You could of course have VMS connected as the console...

I have a problem getting any *nix OS onto my Alpha's because I do not run it
on Intel hardware as well... I have yet to find a bootable install for Alpha
of NetBSD, Linux, etc. I would love to play with it but my 2 Alpha's are
the only hardware I have available to play with... my Windows boxes need to
stay Windows and working (one to support the office, it is their machine
after all and one for the kids and wife to play with).

Every install I have seen says to use an existing system and net boot from
it. The last time I looked into this was a year ago or so, but I don't
think much has changed on the Alpha side since then. I have install media
(many copies, actually) for VMS for (one of) those Alpha's. I have install
media for Win2000RC2 for the other. Since I can play with VMS at work, I
would like to set one or both of these up at home with a *nix, but have not
been able to get there yet. None of the other hardware I have collected has
been able to get me there. My most recent attempt was Ubuntu on my parents
old Compaq machine, but the install never starts.

In article ,
Michael Kraemer wrote:

> the respective workstations. It's only the machine, the CD set
> and me to get them up and running. On a scale which measures
> ease of installation until GUI and networking is running,
> VMS takes the absolute bottom notch, IMHO.

Have you tried it? If VMS comes on CD, you only need a serial terminal
to load it.

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