HP loses another large customer - VMS

This is a discussion on HP loses another large customer - VMS ; On Nov 20, 10:54 am, yyyc186 wrote: > > Oh well, I look forward to the day in the not too distant future where > HP's stock is trading below $12.00/share. Based on their latest earnings report & forecast, that ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 51

Thread: HP loses another large customer

  1. Re: HP loses another large customer

    On Nov 20, 10:54 am, yyyc186 wrote:
    >
    > Oh well, I look forward to the day in the not too distant future where
    > HP's stock is trading below $12.00/share.


    Based on their latest earnings report & forecast, that won't likely be
    anytime soon.

  2. Re: HP loses another large customer

    Michael Kraemer wrote:
    > In article
    > <2036a76c-a695-4b63-9fb7-d3a87194d7b9@d50g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
    > yyyc186 writes:
    >
    >>
    >> What HP hasn't realized is that nearly every customer leaving VMS is
    >> leaving HP completely, not even buying their PC's for desktops or
    >> notebooks or printers. Some are moving to AIX, others are moving to
    >> Ubuntu. By the time HP realizes it, their stock will be trading
    >> below $12.00/share.

    >
    > Looking at HPs recent results one gets the impression they
    > couldn't care less about customers dropping BCSs products first
    > and HP altogether later. Their commodity sections are in good shape
    > and the few disgruntled VMS or HP-UX customers wouldn't change that.


    As I (among others) have almost perennially stated.

    Given declining consumer confidence and all sorts of other problems with the
    US economy, I wonder whether the "consumer" HP (as opposed to the prevoius
    incarnations of "engineer" or "business" HP) will weather an economic
    downturn or simply implode upon itself.

    Ramen.
    Dr. Dweeb (a new acolyte)



  3. Re: HP loses another large customer

    "Bill Gunshannon" wrote in message
    news:5qg5q4FvmjuaU2@mid.individual.net...
    > In article <13k4pj1fjm74j7d@corp.supernews.com>,
    > "Michael D. Ober" writes:
    >> "Main, Kerry" wrote in message
    >> news:C72D63EB292C9E49AED23F705C61957BDEBA430780@G1 W0487.americas.hpqcorp.net...
    >>
    >> That's why virtualization is all the rage now. Neither Linux nor Windows
    >> was architected to easily configure and support multiple applications on
    >> the
    >> server side.

    >
    > What? As regards Linux, what part of multi-tasking do you not understand?
    >


    It's not a lack of multitasking. Both Windows and Linux multitask
    reasonably well. The issue is the configuration of a large application and
    what happens when two or more of these large apps both try to reconfigure
    the OS for themselves. Both MS and Linux are abject failures when it comes
    to configuring multiple, large, line of business apps on a single OS
    instance.

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





  4. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article <5qg5q4FvmjuaU2@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    > In article <13k4pj1fjm74j7d@corp.supernews.com>,
    > "Michael D. Ober" writes:
    >> "Main, Kerry" wrote in message
    >> news:C72D63EB292C9E49AED23F705C61957BDEBA430780@G1 W0487.americas.hpqcorp.net...
    >>
    >> That's why virtualization is all the rage now. Neither Linux nor Windows
    >> was architected to easily configure and support multiple applications on the
    >> server side.

    >
    > What? As regards Linux, what part of multi-tasking do you not understand?


    The only reasons you can't host multiple applications on one Windows
    servers are:

    1) they crash too often, which means multiple applcations would
    be unavailable if they were on the same server

    2) they have too many security holes, which means one
    application's breakin would lead to multiple application's breach
    (MS always told us no to host a web service on a file server for
    just that reason)

    In other words, Windows sucks.

    The only reason you can't host multiple applications on Linux is
    because your IT manager thinks everything is as bad as MS.


  5. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article <39f9c502-5247-4255-8b6e-c5fc5d673f70@b15g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, Doug Phillips writes:
    > On Nov 20, 10:54 am, yyyc186 wrote:
    >>
    >> Oh well, I look forward to the day in the not too distant future where
    >> HP's stock is trading below $12.00/share.

    >
    > Based on their latest earnings report & forecast, that won't likely be
    > anytime soon.


    The latest earnings reports shows that HP's fight with Lexmark over
    Lexmark's proprietary ink cartridges taught HP to sell ink in no
    uncertain manner. And HP has taken that lesson to the bank loud
    and clear.


  6. Re: HP loses another large customer

    Michael D. Ober wrote:
    > "Main, Kerry" wrote in message
    >> Interesting times ahead .. And fwiw, I think 3GL style programming is a
    >> long, long way from being retired.

    >
    > 3GL will always have a place. I have worked in a pure OO environment
    > and it was an absolute nightmare. The future of development will use a
    > combination of 3GL and later development methodologies.


    ????

    Some of the most popular OO languages (C++, Java and C#) are 3GL
    languages.

    Arne

  7. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article <13k6vjv81t4nb7b@corp.supernews.com>,
    "Michael D. Ober" writes:
    > "Bill Gunshannon" wrote in message
    > news:5qg5q4FvmjuaU2@mid.individual.net...
    >> In article <13k4pj1fjm74j7d@corp.supernews.com>,
    >> "Michael D. Ober" writes:
    >>> "Main, Kerry" wrote in message
    >>> news:C72D63EB292C9E49AED23F705C61957BDEBA430780@G1 W0487.americas.hpqcorp.net...
    >>>
    >>> That's why virtualization is all the rage now. Neither Linux nor Windows
    >>> was architected to easily configure and support multiple applications on
    >>> the
    >>> server side.

    >>
    >> What? As regards Linux, what part of multi-tasking do you not understand?
    >>

    >
    > It's not a lack of multitasking. Both Windows and Linux multitask
    > reasonably well. The issue is the configuration of a large application and
    > what happens when two or more of these large apps both try to reconfigure
    > the OS for themselves.


    Name an application that tries to or even could "reconfigure the OS" under
    Unix.

    > Both MS and Linux are abject failures when it comes
    > to configuring multiple, large, line of business apps on a single OS
    > instance.


    That is utterly absurd. Businesses have been running their operations
    on Unix for decades. Until the advent of cheap PC's capable of running
    Unix it was frequently done with the entire business on one machine.
    Heck, Dennis Ritchie shared the machine he was developing Unix on with
    people doing real business applications!!!

    bill

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

  8. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article <474a3981$0$90270$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes:
    >
    > Some of the most popular OO languages (C++, Java and C#) are 3GL
    > languages.


    Some of the best OO code I've ever seen was written in Macro-32
    decades before the term was coined.


  9. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article <5r00e1F126q9jU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    >
    > Name an application that tries to or even could "reconfigure the OS" under
    > Unix.


    Oracle. Don't even try to install it without the root password
    handy.


  10. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article ,
    koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
    > In article <5r00e1F126q9jU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    >>
    >> Name an application that tries to or even could "reconfigure the OS" under
    >> Unix.

    >
    > Oracle. Don't even try to install it without the root password
    > handy.


    Just becuase it needs the roor password to write things like
    startup info in tot /etc (or other directories) does not mean
    it is "reconfiguring the OS". I would bet that most applications
    (like Oracle) require system access on VMS as well. I know
    installing any compiler does. Are they also "reconfiguring the OS"?

    bill

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

  11. Re: HP loses another large customer

    On Nov 26, 10:38 am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob
    Koehler) wrote:
    > In article <5r00e1F126q9...@mid.individual.net>, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    >
    > > Name an application that tries to or even could "reconfigure the OS" under
    > > Unix.

    >
    > Oracle. Don't even try to install it without the root password
    > handy.


    Nonsense. Ditto for Michael comments which triggered this.
    All IMHO of course.

    Oracle is very consiencious and careful about NOT needed 'root' privs.
    During instal they specifically create a root.sh which is plain to see
    for all and which has to be run with root privs once. No need for a
    password or constant access. You do need a system admin who plays
    along, and will run the script and set up an account or two, but
    that's exactly the same on OpenVMS.

    And any half-decent Oracle install is likely to prompt system
    configuration tweaks, but that's no different for OpenVMS either. I've
    installed SAP and Oracle on the same (unix, and windows) boxes. Both
    are major apps. Both require/encourage system config tweaks but those
    mostly do not fight, but complement.

    My gutfeel is that at this point in time OpenVMS is more nasty to set
    up for distinct applications than your average Unix is, specifically
    when you toss in things like reserved memory, tcp tweaks, lack of a
    generally available LVM (yes I know and like LD, yes Logical Volume
    Managers are more often misused than taken advantage of).

    fwiw,
    Hein van den Heuvel




  12. Re: HP loses another large customer

    Bob Koehler wrote:
    > In article <474a3981$0$90270$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes:
    >
    >>Some of the most popular OO languages (C++, Java and C#) are 3GL
    >>languages.

    >
    >
    > Some of the best OO code I've ever seen was written in Macro-32
    > decades before the term was coined.
    >


    You can write OO code in just about any language. OO is not about
    languages, it's a way to look at/analyze the problem to be solved. Some
    languages encourage/require OO analysis and design.

    The idea behind OO is that you represent an "object" as a package
    consisting of a data structure and all the allowed operations, called
    methods, on that data structure. If the language in use requires OO,
    you can't easily do stupid things like trying to add two windows or
    multiply a window by a file!

    It's a tool, not a panacea!



  13. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article <5r0973F11m0o1U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    >
    > Just becuase it needs the roor password to write things like
    > startup info in tot /etc (or other directories) does not mean
    > it is "reconfiguring the OS". I would bet that most applications
    > (like Oracle) require system access on VMS as well. I know
    > installing any compiler does. Are they also "reconfiguring the OS"?
    >


    Installing anything on VMS that is completely integrated requires
    write access to sys$library:dcltables.exe. And write access to the
    directories where files get put.

    Requiring write access to /bin or /usr/bin for a compiler
    installation on UNIX would be the same type of privilege requirement
    and I would not consider that "reconfiguring the OS".

    As far as Oracle on UNIX, every installation of Oracle I've worked
    with on any UNIX has modified the kernel, at least by changing kernel
    parameters, to suit its needs. That's what I consider "reconfiguring
    the OS". I would feel the same way if a product installed on VMS
    contained new kernel modules or required me to update SYSGEN
    parameters. For compilers there are no kernel modules and typically
    the SYSGEN parameters are optional.


  14. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article <53ec18d4-083d-44a5-866b-7ab000d4af2e@b40g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Hein RMS van den Heuvel writes:
    >
    > Oracle is very consiencious and careful about NOT needed 'root' privs.
    > During instal they specifically create a root.sh which is plain to see
    > for all and which has to be run with root privs once. No need for a
    > password or constant access. You do need a system admin who plays
    > along, and will run the script and set up an account or two, but
    > that's exactly the same on OpenVMS.


    I never said Oracle on VMS was different. And the mods I refered
    to are the ones you'll find in root.sh, they don't need to be
    run repeatedly to be OS mods, they only need to be done at install.

    > My gutfeel is that at this point in time OpenVMS is more nasty to set
    > up for distinct applications than your average Unix is, specifically
    > when you toss in things like reserved memory, tcp tweaks, lack of a
    > generally available LVM (yes I know and like LD, yes Logical Volume
    > Managers are more often misused than taken advantage of).


    Everything you need to tweak on VMS is fully documented. I had an
    LVM on a couple of UNIX and all it did for me was work around a couple
    features missing from ufs.

    Try finding documentation for some of the kernel parameters Oracle
    tweaks on an installation to Ultrix (my first exposure). You need
    a source license (about $40K at the time).

    My gut feel is that you speak from a lack of experience.


  15. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article <474AFAED.5040108@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes:

    > The idea behind OO is that you represent an "object" as a package
    > consisting of a data structure and all the allowed operations, called
    > methods, on that data structure. If the language in use requires OO,
    > you can't easily do stupid things like trying to add two windows or
    > multiply a window by a file!


    I'm quite sure I could do both of those in C++. 8(

    But inheritance is easier in Java than it is in Macro-32. 8)


  16. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article ,
    koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
    > In article <5r0973F11m0o1U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
    >>
    >> Just becuase it needs the roor password to write things like
    >> startup info in tot /etc (or other directories) does not mean
    >> it is "reconfiguring the OS". I would bet that most applications
    >> (like Oracle) require system access on VMS as well. I know
    >> installing any compiler does. Are they also "reconfiguring the OS"?
    >>

    >
    > Installing anything on VMS that is completely integrated requires
    > write access to sys$library:dcltables.exe. And write access to the
    > directories where files get put.
    >
    > Requiring write access to /bin or /usr/bin for a compiler
    > installation on UNIX would be the same type of privilege requirement
    > and I would not consider that "reconfiguring the OS".


    So up to tyhis point we agree.

    >
    > As far as Oracle on UNIX, every installation of Oracle I've worked
    > with on any UNIX has modified the kernel, at least by changing kernel
    > parameters, to suit its needs.


    I find it hard to believe that Oracle doesn't require the same kind
    of copnfiguration changes on VMS. See below.......

    > That's what I consider "reconfiguring
    > the OS". I would feel the same way if a product installed on VMS
    > contained new kernel modules or required me to update SYSGEN
    > parameters. For compilers there are no kernel modules and typically
    > the SYSGEN parameters are optional.


    1.4 Preparing for DEC Ada Installation
    Preparing for DEC Ada Installation
    $ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT F$GETSYI("FREE_GBLPAGES")
    15848
    $ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT F$GETSYI("FREE_GBLSECTS")
    24
    If the returned values are greater than the values in Table 1.2, you
    do not need to increase the values for these parameters. If the value
    of either free global pages or global sections is less than the value
    in Table 1.2, you must increase that system parameter setting.

    Not the term "must" above. Unless you have already set some values
    higher than necessary in the initial SYSGEN you most certainly will
    have to do it to install a compiler. Or DECWindows. Or any number
    of other applications. I usually end out having to do a new SYSGEN
    everytine I install anything unless I just up the numbers more than
    needed on an earlier product. So, tell me again that Oracle doesn't
    require these settings? If you have a problem with Oracle and call
    for support are they not going to tel you to make those changes you
    skipped before trying to resolve your problem? I would guess it is
    possible to actually run Oracle without making the kernel tuning
    changes on Unix, but the same rules would apply.

    bill


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

  17. Re: HP loses another large customer

    Bill Gunshannon wrote:

    > I find it hard to believe that Oracle doesn't require the same kind
    > of copnfiguration changes on VMS. See below.......


    Equaly true for "Oracle Rdb", which is as VMS-ish as
    any software package could be...

    Jan-Erik.

  18. Re: HP loses another large customer

    Bob Koehler wrote:
    > In article <474AFAED.5040108@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes:
    >
    >
    >>The idea behind OO is that you represent an "object" as a package
    >>consisting of a data structure and all the allowed operations, called
    >>methods, on that data structure. If the language in use requires OO,
    >>you can't easily do stupid things like trying to add two windows or
    >>multiply a window by a file!

    >
    >
    > I'm quite sure I could do both of those in C++. 8(


    C++ does give you that "creative freedom". I think most of us
    understand the price for that freedom!



  19. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
    > In article <474AFAED.5040108@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes:
    >
    >> The idea behind OO is that you represent an "object" as a package
    >> consisting of a data structure and all the allowed operations, called
    >> methods, on that data structure. If the language in use requires OO,
    >> you can't easily do stupid things like trying to add two windows or
    >> multiply a window by a file!

    >
    > I'm quite sure I could do both of those in C++. 8(


    Those are _not_ easy to do in Ada 83, which did not have the big
    Object Oriented upgrade of Ada 95. So while Object Oriented
    features might be appropriate for some purposes, they are not
    needed to avoid adding two windows or multiplying a window by a file.

  20. Re: HP loses another large customer

    In article <$DXUdbVgbWzC@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
    Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:
    > In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
    >> In article <474AFAED.5040108@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes:
    >>
    >>> The idea behind OO is that you represent an "object" as a package
    >>> consisting of a data structure and all the allowed operations, called
    >>> methods, on that data structure. If the language in use requires OO,
    >>> you can't easily do stupid things like trying to add two windows or
    >>> multiply a window by a file!

    >>
    >> I'm quite sure I could do both of those in C++. 8(

    >
    > Those are _not_ easy to do in Ada 83, which did not have the big
    > Object Oriented upgrade of Ada 95. So while Object Oriented
    > features might be appropriate for some purposes, they are not
    > needed to avoid adding two windows or multiplying a window by a file.


    And, of course, neither covers the case when you actually did want to
    add two windows or multiply a window by a file. :-)

    bill

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

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast