Conference ricks::dechips

>    Will the EB146LX be certified to run OpenVMS.  If so what will be the
>    minimum supported version?
    

No, the EB164 was the last DS motherboard supported by VMS and at this
point there are no plans to support any of our newer boards under OpenVMS.

/Mike

Just noticed you said "EB146LX" - there is not such board. I assumed you
meant AlphaPC 164LX, our EV56/Pyxis based motherbard.

/mike 

    Mike is correct, I intended to state AlphaPC 164LX, but was unable to
    go back and correct my slip up.
    
    So it seems that DS will produce any new OpenVMS capable mother boards. 
    Would anyone care to predict the OpenVMS direction of some of the non
    Digital logo Alpha workstation and servers?
    
    
    

    I think that this anser is better from the OpenVMS guys, but from
    experience, they are less than enthusiastic about supporting OEM
    boards. It took a long while for the DMCC K2 board to get proper
    OpenVMS support - & that support is the key - it probably works, but without an
    entry in the SPD, who will support the customer - either the OEM or the
    end user?
    
    As an FAE for DS in Europe, I have been asked on several occasions if
    OpenVMS was supported on the DS boards & I had to say no - but that
    things may work. This was fine for an academic education institution
    but not for a commercial facility that values the robustness of OpenVMS
    - not having a proper support policy of testing & qualification
    would, IMHO, cause quality problems & bring the good name of the
    hardware & OS into disrepute...
    
    Jim
                                     

    VMS is for servers, not desktops. OEM motherboards are for desktops.
    
    [This is of course not 100% true but appears to be the business model
    The 'Management' are keen on pursuing]

OpenVMS's strategic direction is toward servers and the high(er) end.
OpenVMS does support some workstations, but generally only the higher-end
ones.  The major reason is money:  we have too much to do and not enough
engineers to do it.  So, we've decided to concentrate our efforts in
servers.  Another reason is that NT or W95 on the desktop is the corporate
(and the industry) direction.

This has been discussed ad nauseam in various places.  If you would like
to complain, or to make a case for supporting one or another platform we
don't support, contact one of the responsible OpenVMS product managers:
Bill Hanley (STAR::HANLEY) or Shay Johnson (STAR::SJOHNSON).

I don't know the details about future support for K2 or the other
third-party systems; contact Bill or Shay if you want the real scoop.

|OpenVMS does support some workstations, but generally only the higher-end
|ones. 
    
    Of the currently shipping (not "mature") workstations:
    
    						NT	UNIX	VMS
    	DIGITAL Personal Workstation 200i	Y	N	N
    	DIGITAL Personal Workstation 266i	Y	N	N
    	DIGITAL Personal Workstation 433a	Y	N	N
    	DIGITAL Personal Workstation 500a    	Y	N	N
    	DIGITAL Personal Workstation 433au	Y	Y	Q4CY97
    	DIGITAL Personal Workstation 500au	Y	Y	Q4CY97
    	Digital AlphaStation 255/233		Y	Y	Y
    	Digital AlphaStation 255/300		Y	Y	Y
    	Digital AlphaStation 500/333		Y	Y	Y
    	Digital AlphaStation 500/400		Y	Y	Y
    	Digital AlphaStation 500/500		Y	Y	Y
    	Digital AlphaStation 600 5/333		Y	Y	Y
    	Digital AlphaStation 600A 5/500		Y	Y	Y
    
    OpenVMS is not supported on Intel workstations.  (Neither is Digital
    UNIX.)
    
    But generally, OpenVMS is indeed supported on Alpha workstations.
    From lowest end to highest end.
    

    For those people who would like to run OpenVMS on a PC164LX, there
    will be an alternative, OpenVMS on the DPW au-Series.
    
    								-mr. bill

    OpenVMS never got into the OEM market as a general business, as Digital
    UNIX had started to do.  We have taken an approach which is to make
    specific investments where we believe there is a business case for it.
    We developed the EB64/164 support because we didn't know if there was a
    market there, but we knew that it might have a positive marketing
    message about OpenVMS.
    
    The sales in this market for both VMS and UNIX have been *very* low. 
    Now there are lots of reasons for this, but in the end it means that it
    isn't a good place to spend development dollars.
    
    VMS will continue to make specific investments where we believe there
    is a business reason to do so.
    
    We will also discuss doing the engineering for a specific product where
    another group *or* company is willing to make the investment (that is,
    pay for our development costs).  This is what we did with the K2
    realtime board.  K2 does not fit into a general VMS market strategy, or
    have a payback for us to invest.  But for a modest cost, the realtime
    group who *did* have a business need got support for their product.
    
    If Digital Semiconductor, or one of the OEMs spinning products based
    on the reference design wants support for the PC164LX, we will be more
    than happy to consider working something out to provide the support if
    *they* wish to make the investment.
    
    This is *unlike* the products that DIGITAL builds in the workstation
    and server groups.  We will support ALL hardware that these groups WANT
    to put OpenVMS on.  In this case, our product management uses as input
    the business case that the hardware product group develops which has
    the justification for OpenVMS support in it.
    
    At *present* OpenVMS runs on pretty much the same hardware as Digital
    UNIX.  Only NT has spun off OS-specific hardware lines.  However, this
    is likely to change soon as the workstation group is actively moving
    away from OpenVMS support (that is, they are *not* requesting support,
    *not* providing a business justification, and *not* providing
    engineering support for the development of OpenVMS, and *not* doing any
    further graphics development for OpenVMS).
    

Rumors start to spread over here (through some WS channels)
that EV6 will be substantially delayed, ie. we will not see any 
EV6 based HW before Q1FY99.

Anyone of those that know dare to comment ? What is the actual status ?
Since we have a EV6 fact sheet publicly accessible on WWW, i'd 
be surprised. Could it be that only systems will be late but
chips on time ?

Same sources also say that to bridge this delay we plan to 
buld a EV57, ie. a .25u EV5 which can be clocked to 800+Mhz.

It would be nice to learn the truth from inside and not in
front of much better informed customers.

rgds
-matthias

re.10 

oops, wrong button....
this should have become a new topic..

sorry..

re .10 - moved to topic 700

    >However, this is likely to change soon as the workstation group is actively
    >moving away from OpenVMS support (that is, they are *not* requesting
    >support, *not* providing a business justification, and *not* providing
    >engineering support for the development of OpenVMS, and *not* doing
    >any further graphics development for OpenVMS).
    
    Dow Chemical uses OpenVMS-based workstations as supervisory control
    stations for approximately 20-30% (and growing) of its manufacturing 
    facilities.  (VMS was selected as the platform for this software
    when it was developed about 6 years ago, for ease of integration with
    their other VMS-based manufacturing systems, and because of its
    robustness and reliability).  What should they do?  Stock up on 
    the currently supported graphics devices?  Will these devices be
    supported on future Alpha workstations?
    
    These systems will likely be in place for another 15 years...
    
    Oh well-- they already have numerous reasons to hate us, but that's
    another story.
    
    Jim

    Yes.  There is the rub.  Your story is relatively common...
    A major government prime builds a critical military aircraft that
    contains VAX servers, and 18 Alpha workstations -- all running OpenVMS.
    They want to move to all Alpha systems on board, and continue with
    OpenVMS... guess what - they need mid-range 3D graphics.  And guess
    what the workstation group has told them... no more OpenVMS 3D
    graphics.
    
    A common story.  Because 18 workstations per aircraft is piddly
    business for the workstation group, they will put a multi-million
    dollar per year business at risk.  You see, they see this as another
    sign that they may need to get off VMS, and if they need to make
    another major investment to get off of VMS on their graphic heads, then
    they may as well look at getting out completely.
    
    A common story indeed.
    
    

    I see these as two very different situations.  If it were me making the
    investment decisions, which it most decidely is not, :
    
    .13 - I'd do my best to support this customer's requirements despite the
    fact that they no longer were on my strategic investment path.  The
    sole reason for supporting them is that past treatment of customers is
    the best predictor of future treatment (unlike the stock market), so
    I'd go out of my way to treat them well to keep from scaring off future
    customers.
    
    .14 - I'd look for the business unit that thought this was a profitable
    business to fund the development since 18 workstations obviously
    doesn't represent a very attractive opportunity.  Like it or not, this
    is the behaviour that product line/division/business unit organizations
    are intended to drive.  You look out for your own interests and let
    everyone else look out for theirs.  I might be talked into donating the
    "opportunity cost" of having my engineers do/supervise the work to the 
    greater corporate good, but no out of pocket money.
    
    There's no question that these situations require delicate balancing
    acts, but it's just as important to know when to move on as it is to be
    loyal to the existing customers.
    
    Tom