somebody@somewhere.something (07/27/88)
In article <41605@felix.UUCP> ff@cpsvax.cps.msu.edu (Bruce McMillin) writes: > > I don't know the exact details of this fiasco, but DEC ships an >ancillary tape along with their Ultrix distribution that actually allows >you to have more than two users running at a time. > > My feelings about the whole scheme are totally unprintable. You can't blame DEC for license since it is something that AT&T insists upon as part of the license that DEC has from AT&T. signed, A. Nony Mouse
casey@admin.cognet.ucla.edu (Casey Leedom) (08/03/88)
In article <50934@felix.UUCP> somebody@somewhere.something writes: > > You can't blame DEC for license since it is something that AT&T insists > upon as part of the license that DEC has from AT&T. And so what about Sun, and most of the other UNIX systems out there? Are they in violation of AT&T's licensing? Almost surely. So why does DEC worry about it out of all the manufacturers of UNIX boxes. Because they've got their heads in the wrong place. Again, as it stands now I would not recommend DEC equipment to someone unless they had special need to run VMS, etc. It just isn't worth the price. In article <50934@felix.UUCP> somebody@somewhere.something writes: > signed, > A. Nony Mouse This is annoying. If you don't want to take responsibility for your own writing, don't write. Casey
francus@pernod.dec.com (08/03/88)
Casey writes: >So why does DEC worry about it out of all the manufacturers of UNIX boxes. >> Signed, >> A. Nony Mouse > This is annoying. If you don't want to take responsibility for your >own writing, don't write. Ok Casey fair enough; my name is Yoseff and I work for DEC. Just because other companies choose to ignore their license from AT&T does not make it right for DEC to do so. So don't start knocking DEC about the licensing issue because DEC follows its license, and everyone else doesn't. How would Sun and all the other companies react if someone violated their license with their products. As regarding pricing/performance issues I'll be happy to take this off-line with you. Please remember that MIPS is a somewhat bogus benchmark, and there are other things to consider besides the box and the operating system (i.e. support). Yoseff Francus Disclaimer: I am an employee of DEC in Ultrix, however these are my thoughts on the matter and should in no way be construed as a statent of corporate policy.
casey@admin.cognet.ucla.edu (Casey Leedom) (08/12/88)
Ok, Yoseff. A very nice response to a very inflammatory article from me. You deserve accolades for your restraint and discretion. I'll try to follow suit and keep this discussion above boards. > In article <51997@felix.UUCP> (Yoseff Francus) francus@pernod.dec.com writes: > > Just because other companies choose to ignore their license from AT&T > does not make it right for DEC to do so. So don't start knocking DEC > about the licensing issue because DEC follows its license, and everyone > else doesn't. How would Sun and all the other companies react if someone > violated their license with their products. > > As regarding pricing/performance issues I'll be happy to take this > off-line with you. Please remember that MIPS is a somewhat bogus > benchmark, and there are other things to consider besides the box and the > operating system (i.e. support). First, I'd be glad to take this off-line, but I think the issues are relevant to this group. As I said above, I promise to try to keep my comments less inflammatory. You're right that N wrongs don't make a right, but AT&T has chosen not to pursue their license on this point. That's their problem till they do, and when they do it will be everyone's problem. But till that point, I really wish DEC would spend more time working on Real Issues rather than random points like these. I hate to harp, but the point is telling: 4.3BSD has been out for over two years now; WHEN IS ULTRIX GOING TO UPGRADE? As for hardware price/performance vs. support ... In my view the initial software that comes with the system and the fundamental reliability of the hardware are the most important items of support a company can offer for their system. This is much more important than the performance of the hardware. If the software is bad or inadequate to begin with, or the hardware won't stay up, no amount of wonderful hand holding from a company or incredible CPU or I/O speed is going to make life any easier. On going hardware and software support is of course also important since no significant piece of hardware or software is without bugs no matter how good it is. I would rate price/performance and third party support as least important (within reason). And I think that's basically what most people look for in a system: base quality of hardware and software; on going hardware and software support; and finally ``MIPS/$'' [sic] and availability of third party support. I think it's pretty obvious to almost anyone on the in that DEC is falling down pretty badly in that last category. Their systems are very low performance and high priced and they're doing their best to eliminate third party support by making their busses proprietary and only licensing to companies producing non-competing products. But since those are the least important features of a system, so what? And that's exactly what it would be (apart from grumblings about how slow things were), except: first, we really use a linear function of our parameters, not strict priority to measure systems, and, second, there are companies out there that are gaining reputations for good hardware/software systems and fair ongoing hardware and software support. And worse (for DEC), while not many would complain about the reliability of their hardware and I view DEC's on going hardware support as some of the best, their software (Ultrix) just isn't keeping up and DEC's on going software support is poor at best. My current feeling is that DEC needs to shake up the Ultrix team and revamp the team's priorities. DEC could also learn something from Sun on software support (as well Sun could learn a lot from DEC in hardware support). They also need to give up on the proprietary nature of their busses. I think a large reason for the success of the PDP-11 and early VAX line was the availability of third party products. DEC's current policy is a misguided attempt to garner 100% of the market for their machines. You'd think that DEC would learn from recent marketing history which seems to show that open systems are more successful than closed. Finally they need to retake some performance ground. The low performance and incredibly high prices are embarrassing. I've heard rumors from a number of sources that these are all concerns within DEC, but there seems to be some difficulty in getting off the dime. Don't get me wrong please, I'm taking issue with DEC from a purely technical basis. I have nothing personal against DEC and I would in fact welcome them back to the field of real contenders. It's to my advantage as a customer to have as many companies as possible producing good products. In any case, I've dribbled on long enough here. Sorry to waste your screen bandwidth ... :-) Casey
francus@pernod.dec.com (08/26/88)
Reply-to: francus@pernod.dec.com In article 15027@shemp (Casey Leedom) writes >I hate to harp, but the point is telling: 4.3BSD has been out for > over two years now; WHEN IS ULTRIX GOING TO UPGRADE? Casey, I would have responded to the above before, but had to wait until Ultrix 3.0 was announced. It has the 4.3 BSD upgrades including BIND and Van Jacobsen TCP/IP. In addition there are now as many engineers in Ultrix Engineering as in VMS engineering. DEC has decided to have a World Class Ultrix and has been hiring in order to reach that goal. 3.0 has sped up Assymetric Multiprocessing (ASMP) and added CI/HSC support. In other words DEC is not just sitting around but is constantly improving Ultrix. Bundled in with Ultrix is DECwindows (based on X windows) which provides a consistent user interface on Ultrix and VMS machines. A user can run an application on an Ultrix machine, and have the server be a VMS machine, and vice versa. A few more points: Since DECwindows is a library built on top of X.11, it leaves the user the option of writing X.11 applications or DECwindows applications. Thus DEC is commited to X as an open standard. In addition, Ultrix v3.0 is the first fully Posix compliant operating system. It is also SVID compliant at the system call and subroutine level, that is "SVID release II, volume I". DEC is committed to tracking Posix, and to the extent that it does not directly conflict, simultaneously tracking System V. >DEC could also learn something from Sun on >software support (as well Sun could learn a lot from DEC in hardware >support). From what I understand, SUN has a relatively small Software Support organization and charges a lot for a software support contract to discourage people from buying software support. Since, I work in Corporate Software Services for Ultrix, I can tell you that DEC is actively (very actively) training their support organizations in Ultrix; in fact that is part of my groups job. > The low performance and incredibly high prices are embarrassing. > > I've heard rumors from a number of sources that these are all concerns >within DEC, but there seems to be some difficulty in getting off the dime. I wish I could say something about the above, but I obviously can't deny or confirm rumors. Also, the 3000 and 6000 series are fast minis that I believe compare nicely with other vendors. I don't have benchmarks in front of me so I can't provide figures. Anyone have figures that do not come from any vendor?? >Don't get me wrong please, I'm taking issue with DEC from a purely >technical basis. I have nothing personal against DEC and I would in fact >welcome them back to the field of real contenders. It's to my advantage >as a customer to have as many companies as possible producing good >products. > I'm really glad that we've been able to keep this discussion at a very civilized, informative level. Yoseff Disclaimer: I work for DEC. However, the opinions expressed above are solely my own and should in no way be construed as official DEC policy.