leland@DRAGONFLY.WRI.COM (04/02/91)
I am happy that HP announced the 700 so I can speak of it. The 700
is indeed a gloriously fast machine, and the performance and
responsiveness of the machine will be an excellent competition for
Open Windows. In fact, more than excellent.
To me as an Apollo user the decision to not run Domain/OS on these
platforms is a very very bad mistake. HP has already made Apollo users
feel unwanted by announcing the software death of a great number of
products that are still viable. It would not take many tweaks to the
DM functionally to convert normal Unix users in droves.
Note it would still take a fair amount of programming time, for in all
fairness the prodict would have to run under X/Motif and would have to be
available on many more platforms than Apollos.
Here is what frustrates me the most about the 700. The machine
arrived with an Apollo still packing list. It has an Apollo style
light pattern on the front. No HP-IB interface is standard. All the
screws on the back are the interchangeable and the machine is
incredibly easy to service. This machine seems to be, in fact, an Apollo
in HPs clothing. In addition, Domain/OS 10.3 has a predefined
macro __ISP_PA_RISC which is always 0.
Does this ring to you like it does to me? Did HP kill Domain/OS on the
700? Was it planned, and even begun? You know, I bet some engineer deep
in the guts of HP has a great story to tell about it.
Pity we customers will never know.
This is my opinion as an Apollo user and sys admin, and of course,
has nothing to do with WRI.
Leland Ray
Wolfram Research, Inc.
(217) 398-0700
leland@wri.comreb@quintro.uucp (Roger E. Benz) (04/03/91)
In article <9104011930.AA04990@hera.wri.com> leland@DRAGONFLY.WRI.COM writes: >I am happy that HP announced the 700 so I can speak of it. The 700 >is indeed a gloriously fast machine, and the performance and >responsiveness of the machine will be an excellent competition for >Open Windows. In fact, more than excellent. > I agree. The specs make this machine look VERY nice. >To me as an Apollo user the decision to not run Domain/OS on these >platforms is a very very bad mistake. HP has already made Apollo users >feel unwanted by announcing the software death of a great number of >products that are still viable. It would not take many tweaks to the >DM functionally to convert normal Unix users in droves. > I too am beginning to feel unwanted. Why didn't HP port Domain/OS? If their answer is because OSF/1 will do everything Domain/OS does, then I would like to see our third party software running on it (Mentor, Intermetrics, uniplex, Esof, AutoCad, etc). Also, if OSF/1 is the answer to everything, then why is HP-UX running on the 700? Are they better than we are? >Note it would still take a fair amount of programming time, for in all >fairness the prodict would have to run under X/Motif and would have to be >available on many more platforms than Apollos. > >Here is what frustrates me the most about the 700. The machine >arrived with an Apollo still packing list. It has an Apollo style >light pattern on the front. No HP-IB interface is standard. All the >screws on the back are the interchangeable and the machine is >incredibly easy to service. This machine seems to be, in fact, an Apollo >in HPs clothing. In addition, Domain/OS 10.3 has a predefined >macro __ISP_PA_RISC which is always 0. > >Does this ring to you like it does to me? Did HP kill Domain/OS on the >700? Was it planned, and even begun? You know, I bet some engineer deep >in the guts of HP has a great story to tell about it. > >Pity we customers will never know. > >This is my opinion as an Apollo user and sys admin, and of course, >has nothing to do with WRI. > > Leland Ray > Wolfram Research, Inc. > (217) 398-0700 > leland@wri.com Even though we are very strong HP supporters, this is enough to make us consider other platforms. If apollo won't listen to us, why should we listen to them. As a note, we have trashed all 700 product info that we have received. Why keep it around, we can't use the machine. -- Roger E. Benz Glenayre/Quintron Phone = (217) 223-3211 One Quintron Way Quincy, IL UUCP: tiamat!quintro!reb@uunet or quintro!reb@lll-winken
chen@digital.sps.mot.com (Jinfu Chen) (04/04/91)
In article <9104011930.AA04990@hera.wri.com> leland@DRAGONFLY.WRI.COM writes: >in HPs clothing. In addition, Domain/OS 10.3 has a predefined >macro __ISP_PA_RISC which is always 0. A few weeks back before the news about 9000/700 running lose, there is an article in Unix Today! mentioned about the Snake box can run Domain/OS on top of HP-UX (emulation?) with expected slower performance. I share the same feeling of being abandoned by HP. I have yet to take the OSF seminar to see how much it can offer as an alternative OS. Based on the article in ADUS Ring (Vol 5 No 1) titled "OS and OSF News", OSF/1 still has way to go before replacing majority of Domain/OS functionalities. And the sad part is, HPollo doesn't seem to be interested to push OSF to add Domain/OS specific functionalities to OSF/?. For example, when asked about command similar to 'crp', the answer is "its not standard and "better isn't better, the standard is better" - that's the big lesson of Apollo, right?)...
rwilkie@APOLLO.COM (Richard Wilkie) (04/04/91)
Jinfu, Just to correct a misunderstanding before it becomes a larger problem. Domain/OS will NOT run on top of HP-UX in any way. Domain/OS will NOT run on the Series 700 machines. Also, I should point out that we are pushing (as much as possible) of Domain functions into both our OSF offering and the OSF standard. The DCE is a good example, DSEE, DDE and DPAK are also planned for our OSF. We in Chelmsford are very proud of many of the Domain advances and want to see them evolve into common functions. We are working to make this happen. rich wilkie In article <9104011930.AA04990@hera.wri.com> leland@DRAGONFLY.WRI.COM writes: >in HPs clothing. In addition, Domain/OS 10.3 has a predefined >macro __ISP_PA_RISC which is always 0. A few weeks back before the news about 9000/700 running lose, there is an article in Unix Today! mentioned about the Snake box can run Domain/OS on top of HP-UX (emulation?) with expected slower performance. I share the same feeling of being abandoned by HP. I have yet to take the OSF seminar to see how much it can offer as an alternative OS. Based on the article in ADUS Ring (Vol 5 No 1) titled "OS and OSF News", OSF/1 still has way to go before replacing majority of Domain/OS functionalities. And the sad part is, HPollo doesn't seem to be interested to push OSF to add Domain/OS specific functionalities to OSF/?. For example, when asked about command similar to 'crp', the answer is "its not standard and "better isn't better, the standard is better" - that's the big lesson of Apollo, right?)...
rand@hwcae.cfsat.honeywell.com (Douglas K. Rand) (04/05/91)
>>>>> On 4 Apr 91 12:11:58 GMT, rwilkie@apollo.com (Richard Wilkie) said: > Domain/OS will NOT run on top of HP-UX in any way. Domain/OS will NOT > run on the Series 700 machines. Just my two cents worth.... No flames intended. I've been watching this discussion for a few days now, and I'd just like to voice my opinion. I don't much mind that Domain/OS is dying a slow death. It is a good operating system, but it sounds like OSF will be many of the good things of Domain/OS, and many of the Unix things I like. (Please, I don't mean to start a Domain/OS vs. Unix war; I like Domain/OS too.) I do mind that Domain/OS is dying a very quick and immediate death when new hardware is concerned. *IF* the rumors about the DN10K upgrades not happening are true, those of us stuck with Domain/OS are stuck! Yes, I want to move to OSF. But it isn't even released yet. Even if it is released tomorrow, it will take our vendors months, perhaps years (can you say Mentor Graphics?) to get to OSF. So, what do we do till then. Why does HP-UX get a free ride? I gotta admit that it sounds like HP bought Apollo, and doesn't really care about Apollo's old customers. Yes, we got the 400's (and I like them alot). But, what do we do till we get to OSF? Please keep up with OSF. It will be a good thing. But don't forget about us. And don't give us this stuff that its in OSF. We don't have OSF. We won't be running OSF for at least 18-24 months Give us hardware we can use now. -- Douglas Keenan Rand Honeywell -- Air Transport Systems Division Phone: +1 602 436 2814 US Snail: P.O. Box 21111 Phoenix AZ 85036 Internet: @cim-vax.honeywell.com:rand@hwcae.cfsat.honeywell.com -or- rand@ssdc.honeywell.com UUCP: ...!uunet!asuvax!apciphx!hwcae!rand
burdick@hpspdra.HP.COM (Matt Burdick) (04/05/91)
> I too am beginning to feel unwanted. Why didn't HP port Domain/OS? > If their answer is because OSF/1 will do everything Domain/OS does, > then I would like to see our third party software running on it > (Mentor, Intermetrics, uniplex, Esof, AutoCad, etc). Also, if OSF/1 > is the answer to everything, then why is HP-UX running on the 700? > Are they better than we are? I'm sure that this sort of software will become available on the OSF OS - with HP, DEC, IBM, etc all supporting it, I think that the companies who produce these will see real benefits to an OSF port. As to why HP-UX runs on the s700 while Domain/OS doesn't - I assume it's because HP-UX already runs on the s800 and is a relatively trivial port to the s700 architecture. -matt -- Matt Burdick | Hewlett-Packard burdick@hpspd.spd.hp.com | Intelligent Networks Operation