Conference 7.286::digital

    Possibly a VLC with external disk ?   The lowest Advertised price I
    have seen is in the <$4000 range in Digital Review et al.
         

    Do you intend to keep this machine powered up 24 hours a day? 

    I can boot up my PC in a few minutes, but every time I boot up a VMS
    system it takes ages.

    Jamie.

I've seen barebones Microvax IIs advertised in usenet for as little as $800.

Your best bet would probably be used stuff for hardware.  The issue here
is that performance would be real dog since the cheap used stuff is
generally old.  Also you would have to add thing like the following.  I
don't have prices in front of me so these are approximate.

1)  VMS doc set - a couple grand + a couple grand per year to maintain
	you could do CD-ROM which would add  to the hardware cost but
	would save you big in the long run

2)  a compiler - about $1000 for the license then you need media/doc and
	maintenence.

3)  VAXset - something like $5,000

You could get the hardware for about 50% of list by declaring yourself an
independent software vendor (which you would be).  This would get you the 
hardware for about $5,000.  A properly configured VLC will list out at
10,000 standalone.  To this add the software components.  My brother works
for a consulting company.  About a year ago they wanted to get a "cheap"
VMS machine.  The hardware ended up being in the 8-10k range but the
software took them into the mid 20s.

Compare this to a $2000 PC for a VERY nice system.  100-300 for a compiler
and virtually everything else is less than $250.  You can also get great
deals on Lotus an MS products (office ones) through employee purchase.

Finally, if you are looking for a hedge against being laid off consider the
following...

If you got laid off much of the reason would be because your skills
are no longer needed (please don't bash this, I'm making a point
that requires this line of reasoning).  The skills you have (VMS) 
are tied to the hardware that you are considering purchasing.  It
would therefore be doubly bad to invest in VMS as a hedge against
loosing your job.  (i.e. you loose your job because the world doesn't
want VMS so you spend more money on the thing the world doesn't  want.

One exception to this reasoning is if you would develop software for the
VMS niche.  There is plenty of money to be made in a niche the size of
VMS but the odds of success may not be great.  Also, you could consider
consulting to the multitude of companies that still use VMS, there are
LOTS of them.  This way, they pay for the systems you use.

Ken Slattery

    >I can boot up my PC in a few minutes, but every time I boot up a VMS
    >system it takes ages.
    
    now VMS has FASTBOOT, it takes only few minutes to boot also.
    /nasser

    re: Cheap VAX machines
    
    If you want "cheap", try used VS2000s.  I've seen ads in the latest
    Digital News & Review for a bare-bones VS2000 for about $300.  Add some
    cash for an RD54 or MAXTOR 2190 (~$700) and an extra memory upgrade
    (about $100-200 to bring it up to 6 meg, which runs DECwindows but
    probably not MOTIF).
    
    Also seen ads for VS2000 with 6 meg and RD32 (uggh) for $995.  You
    could add an unsupported Microscience HH-1090 (80 meg; $375 new) and make
    it "usable" in a minimum sort of way.
    
    Might be adequate for personal use or for a post-DEC startup venture
    into VMS software.  If you began to receive ROI, then you could invest
    in more current technology.
    
    None of this speaks to the issue of software licensing, however.
    
    FWIW
    
    -- Russ

Article 42635 of misc.forsale.computers:
Xref: oct17.dfe.dec.com misc.forsale.computers:42635 comp.os.vms:22304 misc.forsale:36012
Newsgroups: misc.forsale.computers,comp.os.vms,misc.forsale
Path: oct17.dfe.dec.com!pa.dec.com!decwrl!sdd.hp.com!wupost!ukma!vlsi!ulkyvx.louisville.edu!rstuzi01
From: [email protected]
Subject: Price Reduced: MicroVax II 4 Sale
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Lines: 24
Sender: [email protected] (Network News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: ulkyvx02.louisville.edu
Organization: University of Louisville
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 02:07:37 GMT

Price Reduced... Need to sell soon.

  MicroVax II:

  BA23 Cabinet
  2 megs RAM
  DZV11 (4 port serial board)
  RX50 dual floppies and controller
  Emulex SMD Controller
  270 Meg FUJI SMD Drive (External, rack mountable)
  Several boxes of VMS manuals.
  1 CIT-101 Terminal.

  The system works well & is running VMS 5.4-3.  I Also have an old version
  of ULTRIX on floppies that goes with it.

  Asking $1200 or best offer.

-- 
    //////   //// //////      [email protected]
   //   // //      //    /   [email protected]
  //////   ////   //   -*-  [email protected]
 // \\       //  //    /
//   \\  ////   //        Rick S. Tuzinowski * PO Box 5296 * Louisville KY 40255

I know there are some special situations which would make this
a good deal; however, if I were starting up my own business
and had to pick a software development platform and market,
I would not start with VMS.  

I love VMS, I really do.  Unix cannot touch it and DOS sucks.
Windows is getting there.  HOWEVER, the PC market is too big
to ignore.  Although the h/w is getting cheaper, it's the
software licenses that will eat you alive.  Think about it,
the software kit costs more than most good PC packages.

If you think you can't do serious work on a MVII or VS2000...

My last job was with a startup building a 4GL with its own DBMS.
We had eight engineers doing BLISS compiles, links, and testing on a 730.
For a while we worked two (overlapping) shifts because of response time.
We later upgraded to a MVII.

Working for a hardware company spoils you (NOTIME is a 4000-60, so I know).

Gerald,

	I must concede your point.  One of the reasons
I accepted a position at DEC was to get my hands on some hardware
and training.  My previous employer is running an entire
building (130+ engineers/secretaries) on a 3100.
I have a better system at home.

  Since I was thinking of using this computer for myself, and not for a small
business, it looks like the VMS license fee would be a show-stopper. Since you
have answered my question (thanks for your replies so far), my next question
is: Why is the license fee for VMS so high, compared to MS-DOS, etc.? Is it
because Digital assumes that nobody will buy a VMS system for home use, even
if the software license is free?

    Each time VMS gets a new feature (clustering, whatever), whether its
    used or not, it bumps up the price of VMS.  Over the years it has just
    grown into a gargantuan pig... the license transfer cost to Gaubatz'
    worksystems group is close to $2k per box, which is one of the reasons
    their transfer costs are sky high, they can't compete, projects get
    cancelled, folks get TFSO'd, etc.  It used to be just viewed as funny
    money when VAXes sold like hotcakes; now it's a ball and chain around
    their necks.

	Well maybe its time to bring back DesktopVMS again ;-).

    re: .11
    
    In all fairness to the VMS people, let's remember that DOS is a toy
    while VMS is commercial grade.  I have a hard time comparing UNIX to
    VMS (I'm biased).  However, if you want to see desktopVMS, all you have
    to do is wait for Windows NT.  I read the white paper.  My first
    comment was, 'This sounds just like VMS."  Then I found out who was
    running the Windows NT show at Microsoft, none other than Dave Cuttler
    himself.

    re: -.1
    
    WNT = VMS + 1
    
    Steve

    It's horses for courses. For a home system, MSDOS and UNIX are dandy,
    cheap with much cheap compilers and software. Consider that Borland
    have sold 650,000 C++ compilers - more than all our compiler sales put
    together. Sure they make less money per unit sale, but who cares....
    
    /a

    re: .14
    
>    In all fairness to the VMS people, let's remember that DOS is a toy
>    while VMS is commercial grade. 
    
    There are something like 80,000,000 PC's out there running this "toy"
    operating system.  I'd guess that most of the small business in the
    country bet their existances on it.  How on earth do you define
    "commercial"?
    
    VMS's "commercial grade" reminds me of unix's "elegance".  Both have
    had their lunches eaten by this MS-DOS "toy".
    
    DEC business decisions based on your distinction haven't cut it for
    years and certainly won't do anything for the future.
    
    -joe tomkowitz

    now kids, lets play nice
    
    

    Re: 14
    
    I have NT on one of my systems.  There's nothing in the user levels
    that looks remotely like the VMS user interface.  Are you expecting
    a VMS subsystem to come rumbling down the pike?
    

    80,000,000 in the US alone, more like 200,000,000 PC's in the world.

    
    Could these 200 000 000 be bought because sometimes simple is more
    elegant then the most complex work of art. And even more important,
    users can understand what they have.
    
    I saw a couple of days ago the first time a comment from our management
    saying something I said ( :') ) after one of our network universities a
    few years ago: We need to have a user view to the computing. Thinking
    should always be started from the end user functionality. After years
    of architectural planning we have not been able to combine our
    different efforts into a system which looks one (preferably easy to
    build and learn) entity for the user.
    
    --Ritva
    
    

Re: a few back and toy operating systems.

Sorry, DOS is not commercial grade in the industry definition.  Period.
20E6 copies does not make it commercial grade - however, your point is well
taken.  Let me elaborate on what TOY operating systems do.  First, your easiest
way to clear a problem between applications is to reboot.  If that doesn't work,
turn off the computer and make sure everything gets reset.  Secondly, how many
of you have had problems with limited memory?  Redo them TSRs, relocate, my new
program wants that address space, etc, etc.

In the context of my statement, comparing DOS and VMS is an apples and oranges comparison.
Period.


Re: .19

I never said anything about the user interface.  Probably the closest thing
to a UI for VMS is DCL but that distinction is being blurred by the
number of GUIs appearing.  Session manager, XDesktop, etc.  My comment was specifically
related to the description of some of its internal features.  VMS has reasonable methods
of paging and memory management, memory protection, multi-user support.  Nothing 
specific to VMS, just a good multi-user operating system which handles everything.
What struck me was the similarity of the descriptions of the internal features.

Charlie - who is close to buying a PC, has used PCs, acknowledges their power,
but still realizes that DOS is very limited.

re Note 2082.22 by 501CLB::GILLEY:

> Let me elaborate on what TOY operating systems do.  

        Apparently, your definition of "toy" would not agree with
        most computer users and dictionaries.

        Bob

I use the word in the context I have seen DOS described.
Most of the times that I have seen DOS and TOY in the same
sentence it has been an external write up (non-DEC).

    I thought there was a simple definition of a "toy" operating
    system.  If it doesn't have true multitasking, it's a toy.

re .<<< Note 2082.22 by 501CLB::GILLEY "All of my applications are VUP Suckers!" >>>
>                           -< Hmmm, fangs and all. >-
>
>Sorry, DOS is not commercial grade in the industry definition.  Period.
    
    You ARE kidding, right?  At first I thought you were serious.
    
    It's generally accepted that that attitude helped us to achieve our
    present position of financial prominence, but I just presumed that
    head_in_the_sand, narrow minded silliness was on the rapid decline.
    
    I apologize for not recognizing your humor.  You "got" me, there.
    
    Sigh...........I wish I had as much Toys-R-Us stock as I have Digital
    stock.
    
    Dave

Dave,

	No humor, dead serious.  Don't pull it out of context.
Did I say, "Don't use DOS, it's just a toy?"  Nope, sure didn't.
Just because it is a "toy" operating system does not mean:

a) ignore it;
b) exploit it;
c) it isn't useful.

What it does mean is that you have to build on DOS to provide
the application integrity that is demanded.  An even then, 
ever read the disclaimers by software vendors?  Basically,
they cannot and will not guarantee that their code will
work unless no other application is in the vicinity.


So, before this becomes a complete rat-hole, let's change what
I said about DOS being a TOY operating system, let's call it
limited.

><<< Note 2082.22 by 501CLB::GILLEY "All of my applications are VUP Suckers!" >>>
>                           -< Hmmm, fangs and all. >-

>taken.  Let me elaborate on what TOY operating systems do.  First, your easiest

Funny, I would have thought it would be a customer which would define
what was a toy operating system to us, and what was not. The last thing
we need is more people putting down what a customer might pay money for.

>way to clear a problem between applications is to reboot.  If that doesn't work,
>turn off the computer and make sure everything gets reset.  Secondly, how many

By your definition then VMS is a toy. I was using a TK70 the other day and
I had to reboot the machine to get the tape out of the drive because the
owning process went into RWAST.

Craig.

Craig,

	Do you have *any* experience with mixed networks?
If you are seriously suggesting that your VMS machine must
be rebooted as often as a DOS machine and it is because of 
VMS, I'd like to see your figures.  The customer site I work
at uses a combination of PCs, MACs (limited) and VAXen.
In almost every case with a PC problem, a reboot fixes it.
Now, I know this isn't a scientific survey, but.....

	

re Note 2082.27 by 501CLB::GILLEY:

> ever read the disclaimers by software vendors?  Basically,
> they cannot and will not guarantee that their code will
> work unless no other application is in the vicinity.

        Do we, Digital, actually guarantee that our code will work
        regardless of the environment?

        Bob

    RE: .22-
    
    >Sigh...........I wish I had as much Toys-R-Us stock as I have Digital
    >stock.
    
    	F.Y.I. & F.W.I.W.- Toys-R-Us store's heartbeats are VAX-FT systems, at 
    least in this area....
    
    Phil

    

    
    
    All very interesting, but religious wars seldom achieve much. Are there
    any real lessons here or just hot air?
    
    /a

  As Charlie said in .27, read carefully and don't pull quotes out of context.
  I get the distinct impression that the "Hey, you were kidding ?" brigade
  like to show they've jumped on a more recent bandwagon than the old
  attitudes towards PCs.

  This recent string smacks more of PC = "Politically Correct" than
  PC = "Personal Computer".

  Frank

RE:               <<< Note 2082.32 by ASICS::LESLIE "Andy Leslie" >>>
    
�    All very interesting, but religious wars seldom achieve much. Are there
�    any real lessons here or just hot air?
    
    Well Andy, I'm not so sure it's a religious war (I mean, you can't
    compare VMS to DOS), but there are some lessons to be learnt here.
    
    The only things VMS and DOS really have in common, is that they are
    operating systems. For instance, unlike VMS with its one platform, and
    relatively small number of users, DOS, with all its limitations,
    adequately fills the business needs of many MILLIONS of commercial
    users. Sitting as it does on machines costing as little as $200, it
    still sells by the barrow load daily, and generates a lot of profit
    for Microsoft. Frankly, to denounce it as a "toy", is intellectual
    snobbery of the worst kind, and as someone pointed out earlier, is
    exactly the kind of attitude that has got us into the position we find
    ourselves in today.
    
    I'm appalled that there is even one person in this company that cannot
    see that. The customer (ie. the market) is always right, even when it's
    wrong. Whatever the bells and whistles, multi-tasking or no, having the
    world's most esoterically perfect OS is useless if (relatively
    speaking) no-one wants to buy it.
    
    The market makes demands, and if we are to succeed, nay if we are to
    SURVIVE, we need to answer those demands. Telling the customer that the
    OS (and therefore equipment) that is happily and adequately supporting
    his business is a "toy", is the fastest way to economic oblivion.
    
    I trust those that matter in this company have the intelligence and
    open-mindedness to start addressing the demands of the market, and not
    to sit in their self-constructed ivory towers of intellectual bigotry,
    fiddling while Rome burns. I'll say it again, and I'll type it in
    really slowly: We need to start answering the demands of the market,
    not sneering and telling the market what we think it should want.
    
    Laurie.

    RE: .33
    
    I read .27 very differently Frank. The word "back-pedalling" sprang to
    mind...
    
    Laurie.

Laurie,

	As I've found in notes and esp. this conf. you just cannot put enough
explanation into text to prevent someone from jumping all over you.  In fact,
when one refers to DOS as a TOY operating system, it implies the typical
definition - limited.  Whether or not it is useful, it is limited just the 
same.  I'm not going to make the case for the limitations of DOS.  If DOS was so
wonderful, the media would not have been moaning about it for so long.

	Never fear!  Salvation is not far from the dreaded TOS.  We have windows
NT coming.  A real operating system in that it provides VMS features.  :-)

    Jeepers, so much ado about nothing.  I'm a PCI specialist, I even like
    the damned things (most of the time) and I still think they're toys.
    
    First, MS-DOS, strictly speaking, isn't even an operating system.  It
    is a Disk Operating System.  Check out the DOS BIOS listings sometime -
    it's strong on disk operations and not much else.  Plus, it lets any
    user or application bypass it completely and directly address the ROM
    BIOS and/or hardware.  Hell, that's how I write most of my programs -
    DOS is just too slow.
    
    DOS doesn't own the PC market because it is any good.  It is full of
    gotchas, traps, incompatibilities, and headaches.  It's not simple but
    it is simplistic.  Remember, V1.0 was written to fit into an 8k kernel
    and run virtually unmodified CPM programs.  It didn't get any concept
    of networking until 3.1, and the redirector is a ghastly hack that does
    weird things to DOS's internals.  Memory management is a Johnny come
    lately (nightmare), and pseudo-multitasking (via TSRs) was undocumented
    for years.
    
    It owns the market because of the historical accident of IBM
    legitimising the concept of PCs in the minds of the mass market, and
    IBM happened to ship DOS.  Imagine how it would have fared if they had
    released the PC after the Macintosh!
    
    This is, of course, quite incidental to the fact that DEC must and is
    accomodating DOS PCs.  Even the VMS people, once proud custodians of
    the Not Made Here syndrome, are searching for ways to improve
    compatiblity and performance of VAX/VMS systems serving DOS clients. 
    
    But DOS is still a nasty little toy.

    Just to make this topic touch momentarily on the basenoter's concern, I
    recommend buying a PC capable of running Windows NT for $2-3,000 in the
    U.S.  Base requirements seem to be 486DX processor, 12-16 MB RAM, 
    200 MB hard drive, and SCSI CD-ROM.  Then call Microsoft and order the
    developer's kit for about $400, or about $80 without hardcopy
    documentation.
    
    Bob Morrison will then find a programming environment and operating
    system less far removed from VMS than many people would think.  GUIs
    are a different matter; I'd imagine that Microsoft Windows programming
    is quite different from X Windows.  The rest of the noters here will
    find that the hardware and software in this combination resemble
    yesterday's "workstation" (remember the VAXstation 2000?) more than
    they might like.
    
    FWIW, perception of "toys" is a variable thing.  There's a personal
    computer out there which has offered a GUI and multitasking OS since
    1985, installed base 3.5 million worldwide, and is widely dismissed as
    a "game machine."  So perception and capability are seldom the same,
    and technical merit has little to do with perception.
    
    Wes

re Note 2082.36 by 501CLB::GILLEY:

> when one refers to DOS as a TOY operating system, it implies the typical
> definition - limited.  

        Oh, so a high-quality screwdriver is a "TOY", while a Swiss
        Army knife is a commercial grade tool?

        Very often the best tool for a task is the one with the more
        limited function.  Not always, of course.

        Bob

.37 and .38 make the most sense to me.

You can get quite a lot of machine for the money mentioned in .38.  

And the environment HAS come a long way...

	Bob Cohen

>        Oh, so a high-quality screwdriver is a "TOY", while a Swiss
>        Army knife is a commercial grade tool?

    I think the point is that MS-DOS is by no means "high-quality".

    It *is*, however, so pervasive that the quality question is essentially
    moot. (Which may partially explain the quality - any serious upgrade
    would create incompatibility among the many software applications which
    take advantage of holes and bugs in MS-DOS - and when you're that
    pervasive, maintaining compatibility can be more important than
    addressing quality issues.)

    DOS is best thought of as the bootstrap loader for Windows
    
    
    Al
    

    re .41
    
    A quick rathole on your note on quality.  While recognising DOS'
    inherent limitations, one of the factors inhibiting Microsoft's
    development of it is, believe it or not, the US legal system.
    
    Microsoft isn't stupid.  They know how they would like to develop DOS. 
    But, if they incorporated all the features of Norton or PC-Tools, which
    they could have done a long time ago, they would get sued under the
    antitrust laws for monopolistic behaviour.
    
    You don't believe this?  Well, it happened when Quarterdeck (for the
    non-PC literate the maker of QEMM, a 386 memory manager) sued Microsoft
    after the latter introduced DPMI (a new memory management standard)
    with Windows 3.0.  Quarterdeck won, and Microsoft was ordered by a
    federal court to inform 3rd party vendors like Quarterdeck of future
    changes before they happen.  
    
    Similar suits would surely follow if Microsoft made DOS so wonderful
    (!) that they efectively put the Norton's of this world out of
    business.

	Back to the base topic, the dash of cold water
	regarding licensing costs, and general costs of
	ownership of VAXen is the reason Digital is in
	such trouble today.

	How much does it cost to own a VAX to do 20/20 spreadsheets ?

	And how much for a 486 box that uses Lotus or Excel ?

	How much to run All-in-1 ?

	Then, how much to get a PC with Microsoft Office ?

	How much for one of our ( to put it politely, less-than-robust )
	compilers ?  How much for Borland C ?  Microsoft C with
	the Windows SDK can be had for $ 139.00.

	32-bit compilers for OS/2 and NT can be purchased for $500-$700.

	The problem is that our products carry the baggage of all the
	B.S. marketing liaison process coordinators, management 
	facilitator groups, administrative coordination processors,
	etc., etc.  It's tough to pay for all the malarkey, when all
	you want is a good app, or a solid compiler.

	Steve H

    RE: -1
    
    Forget the costs, think how rarely you'll have to reboot it.
    
    Laurie.
    
    PS. It's ALL-IN-1 (tm)

Re: .44

The pricing situation is worse than that.  Admittedly this is hardware...

There is a product that we sell for $x.  You can buy an equivalent product
elsewhere for $y, this is just over half the price of the product we sell. 
So what's new I hear you say. 

The product sold for $y is made in the same assembly line as the one we 
sell for $x.  That assembly line is owned and operated by Digital Equipment 
Corporation.  It costs them about 1/3 of $y to make it.

jb