INFO-VAX Sun, 20 Apr 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 221 Contents: DoublingStocks - Stock Trading Robot Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 RE: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 RE: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Re: Maximum IDE disk size for DS10L ? Re: OT: IBM looking at Macintosh Re: OT: IBM looking at Macintosh ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 01:21:50 -0700 (PDT) From: easta01@yahoo.com Subject: DoublingStocks - Stock Trading Robot Message-ID: <26619f29-e58f-4ee2-8b46-42875b5ed5b2@h1g2000prh.googlegroups.com> DoublingStocks - Stock Trading Robot http://zoneweb.freeweb7.com/double.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:23:04 +0200 From: "P. Sture" Subject: Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Message-ID: In article , "Tom Linden" wrote: > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:02:41 -0700, Main, Kerry wrote: > > I know it isn't Row Address Strobe. Usually I can decode the acronym > from the context, but this one has me stumped, guess I am getting dumb. > > " > Mainframe-Class RAS in the Processor > The Intel Itanium processor was designed from its inception to > deliver mainframe-class availability. It incorporates leading RAS > capabilities for detecting, correcting and containing the kinds of > unavoidable hard and soft errors that can bring down systems or > corrupt data (Table 1 on next page). > " > > I discovered I couldn't cut and paste the above quote from Opera, but > Firefox let me, FWIW. I'm 99% sure they are referring to this meaning of RAS (and not Remote Access Server): "Reliability, Availability, and Serviceability for the Always-on Enterprise" -- Paul Sture Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 02:25:50 -0700 (PDT) From: johnwallace4@gmail.com Subject: Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Message-ID: On Apr 19, 1:56 pm, "Tom Linden" wrote: > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:02:41 -0700, Main, Kerry wrote: > > I know it isn't Row Address Strobe. Usually I can decode the acronym > from the context, but this one has me stumped, guess I am getting dumb. > > " > Mainframe-Class RAS in the Processor > The Intel Itanium processor was designed from its inception to > deliver mainframe-class availability. It incorporates leading RAS > capabilities for detecting, correcting and containing the kinds of > unavoidable hard and soft errors that can bring down systems or > corrupt data (Table 1 on next page). > " > > I discovered I couldn't cut and paste the above quote from Opera, but > Firefox let me, FWIW. > -- > PL/I for OpenVMSwww.kednos.com In this context, RAS usually decodes to something like Reliability, Availability, Serviceability. I haven't had a proper look at the paper yet. What I did note from a quick look was that it seemed heavy on benefits and handwaving, light on real features required to provide real benefits - other than largely-irrelevant core lockstep, the "two bit" thing is the only feature I remember reading about. Some of the features/benefits seemed more like OS kind of things (is "page poisoning" a hardware feature or something any half-decent OS does for you?). Hopefully later in the week I'll be back. The other point to note is that, despite their recent delivery issues, the real technical competitor to Itanium is imo AMD64. AMD64 and Xeon may have mostly the same instruction set, but my reading of the AMD64 architecture and current implementations is that they seem, shalll we say, less legacy-bound than Xeon. CSI (or whatever it's called this week) may reduce some of that gap, perhaps. 2c John ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 13:31:03 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: P. Sture [mailto:paul.sture.nospam@hispeed.ch] > Sent: April 20, 2008 5:23 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 > > In article , > "Tom Linden" wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:02:41 -0700, Main, Kerry > wrote: > > > > I know it isn't Row Address Strobe. Usually I can decode the acronym > > from the context, but this one has me stumped, guess I am getting > dumb. > > > > " > > Mainframe-Class RAS in the Processor > > The Intel Itanium processor was designed from its inception to > > deliver mainframe-class availability. It incorporates leading RAS > > capabilities for detecting, correcting and containing the kinds of > > unavoidable hard and soft errors that can bring down systems or > > corrupt data (Table 1 on next page). > > " > > > > I discovered I couldn't cut and paste the above quote from Opera, but > > Firefox let me, FWIW. > > I'm 99% sure they are referring to this meaning of RAS (and not Remote > Access Server): > > > > "Reliability, Availability, and Serviceability for the Always-on > Enterprise" > > -- > Paul Sture > > Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: > http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html Slightly different versions of RAS are kicking around: 1. RAS =3D reliability, availability, serviceability (most common) 2. RAS =3D reliability, availability, scalability Fwiw, I like to refer to RASS which is 1. Or 2. + Security Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-254-8911 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:07:57 +0200 From: "P. Sture" Subject: Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Message-ID: In article , "Main, Kerry" wrote: > Slightly different versions of RAS are kicking around: > 1. RAS = reliability, availability, serviceability (most common) > 2. RAS = reliability, availability, scalability > > Fwiw, I like to refer to RASS which is 1. Or 2. + Security Thanks. -- Paul Sture Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html ------------------------------ Date: 20 Apr 2008 16:17:53 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Message-ID: <6718lhF2m4eapU2@mid.individual.net> In article , "Main, Kerry" writes: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: P. Sture [mailto:paul.sture.nospam@hispeed.ch] >> Sent: April 20, 2008 5:23 AM >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >> Subject: Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 >> >> In article , >> "Tom Linden" wrote: >> >> > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:02:41 -0700, Main, Kerry >> wrote: >> > >> > I know it isn't Row Address Strobe. Usually I can decode the acronym >> > from the context, but this one has me stumped, guess I am getting >> dumb. >> > >> > " >> > Mainframe-Class RAS in the Processor >> > The Intel Itanium processor was designed from its inception to >> > deliver mainframe-class availability. It incorporates leading RAS >> > capabilities for detecting, correcting and containing the kinds of >> > unavoidable hard and soft errors that can bring down systems or >> > corrupt data (Table 1 on next page). >> > " >> > >> > I discovered I couldn't cut and paste the above quote from Opera, but >> > Firefox let me, FWIW. >> >> I'm 99% sure they are referring to this meaning of RAS (and not Remote >> Access Server): >> >> >> >> "Reliability, Availability, and Serviceability for the Always-on >> Enterprise" >> >> -- >> Paul Sture >> >> Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: >> http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html > > Slightly different versions of RAS are kicking around: > 1. RAS =3D reliability, availability, serviceability (most common) > 2. RAS =3D reliability, availability, scalability > > Fwiw, I like to refer to RASS which is 1. Or 2. + Security On a side note, I am once again serving with DOD (til mid August this time) and we constantly hear the talk of "99.999% uptime required" and "critical systems with lives depending on them". And not a sign or mention of VMS anywhere, go figure. :-) Somebody tell me again how DOD is one of VMS's biggest customers! bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:44:38 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:billg999@cs.uofs.edu] > Sent: April 20, 2008 12:18 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 > > In article > t>, > "Main, Kerry" writes: > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: P. Sture [mailto:paul.sture.nospam@hispeed.ch] > >> Sent: April 20, 2008 5:23 AM > >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > >> Subject: Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 > >> > >> In article , > >> "Tom Linden" wrote: > >> > >> > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:02:41 -0700, Main, Kerry > > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > I know it isn't Row Address Strobe. Usually I can decode the > acronym > >> > from the context, but this one has me stumped, guess I am getting > >> dumb. > >> > > >> > " > >> > Mainframe-Class RAS in the Processor > >> > The Intel Itanium processor was designed from its inception to > >> > deliver mainframe-class availability. It incorporates leading RAS > >> > capabilities for detecting, correcting and containing the kinds of > >> > unavoidable hard and soft errors that can bring down systems or > >> > corrupt data (Table 1 on next page). > >> > " > >> > > >> > I discovered I couldn't cut and paste the above quote from Opera, > but > >> > Firefox let me, FWIW. > >> > >> I'm 99% sure they are referring to this meaning of RAS (and not > Remote > >> Access Server): > >> > >> > >> > >> "Reliability, Availability, and Serviceability for the Always-on > >> Enterprise" > >> > >> -- > >> Paul Sture > >> > >> Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: > >> http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html > > > > Slightly different versions of RAS are kicking around: > > 1. RAS =3D3D reliability, availability, serviceability (most common) > > 2. RAS =3D3D reliability, availability, scalability > > > > Fwiw, I like to refer to RASS which is 1. Or 2. + Security > > On a side note, I am once again serving with DOD (til mid August > this time) and we constantly hear the talk of "99.999% uptime > required" and "critical systems with lives depending on them". > And not a sign or mention of VMS anywhere, go figure. :-) > > Somebody tell me again how DOD is one of VMS's biggest customers! DOD certainly is a big OpenVMS Customer. Whether you believe or not is up to you. Not everyone buys into the hype technology of the day. > > bill > > -- > Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three > wolves > billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. > University of Scranton | > Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include Yeah, and let me guess - the people saying this are under 30 (maybe 35) and are promoting platforms like Windows and Linux that have 5-20 security patches released each and every month. And that does not include the fixes auctioned off privately at sites like this: http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=3D128411&WT.svl=3Dnews1_1 I'll bet the bad guys from other countries are loving these under 30 types. :-) Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-254-8911 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 10:01:51 -0700 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Re: Intel Itanium RAS Comparison with X86 Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:17:53 -0700, Bill Gunshannon wrote: > Somebody tell me again how DOD is one of VMS's biggest customers! Well, they are my biggest! -- PL/I for OpenVMS www.kednos.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 12:40:57 +0000 (UTC) From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) Subject: Re: Maximum IDE disk size for DS10L ? Message-ID: JF Mezei writes: >Marty Kuhrt wrote: >> While HP engineers understood how to update the DQDRIVER to handle the >> 48 bit addressing necessary to get past 128G, they could not get the OK >> to validate it. >Would it really make a difference if they upgraded the DQDRIVER to >support 48 bits if the hardware didn't support it ? From what I've been told via email, the DS10(L) hardware does support the 48 bit I/O if you replace the drive cable. Also the signal line lengths on the board are apparently unknown so longer cables may not work. >Or is this an issue similar to the Vaxstation 3100 where only the first >disk is stuck with the limit, and subsequent drives have greater >independance from the hardware and can support bigger disks ? That was a boot firmware issue, and it only applied to the system disk, not the "first" disk (whatever that is). Any size disk could be made to work as a system disk if certain files were manually placed within the first 1 Gig, but there was no supported way to do that. Also the next VMS upgrade or patch could make your system unbootable, unless you remembered to place the certain files in the first 1 Gig every time. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Apr 2008 16:12:26 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: OT: IBM looking at Macintosh Message-ID: <6718baF2m4eapU1@mid.individual.net> In article , AEF writes: > On Apr 19, 12:05 pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote: >> In article <$yqIL4$wm...@eisner.encompasserve.org>, >> koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: >> >> > In article <66q19aF2ks2a...@mid.individual.net>, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >> >> >> What could possibly make IBM want to do anything at all with VMS? >> >> > IBM knows good stuff when they see it. And they know how to market. >> >> And? Has IBM ever expressed an interest in being the owner of VMS? >> I didn't think so. >> >> And, of course, even if they did, the point still remains that VMS is not >> now and probably never will be for sale. >> >> bill >> >> -- >> Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves >> billg...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. >> University of Scranton | >> Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include > > > C'mon, Bill, be fair. The question wasn't whether IBM was likely or > interested in VMS. The question was Actually, the original statement was, "It would be a hoot if IBM started to port all its software to VMS", which is once again this stranger notion that IBM, "despite HP's best efforts in the other direction" was going to come along and save VMS. Reality time, people, VMS's fate lies in the hands of HP alone. IBM isn't going to save it. Unisys isn't going to save it. No one is going to ride up at the last minute to save it. It's up to HP and we already know what their direction is. > >> >> What could possibly make IBM want to do anything at all with VMS? > > and the answer was quite appropriate. As you say, that is apparently > not enough for them to show interest, and your last point, while it > may well be true, does not invalid Bob's answer in the least. So I'm > not saying your points are wrong. I'm just saying that Bob's answer > was a good answer. Now if the question were, instead, > > "What would be enough for IBM to actually attempt a purchase of VMS?" > > then your criticisms would be quite appropriate. But that wasn't the > question. The fact that IBM apparently does support at least some VMS > installations means that it already does have something to do with > VMS. So the premise of the (original) question isn't even right in the > first place. IBM supports lots of different OSes. They have never bought any of them. IBM owns the OSes it created. I am aware of no OS currently owned by IBM that originated in some other company. Add to that the fact that IBM shows no sign of porting any of their current non-OS software, like DB2, to VMS. Thye are willing to support (and have the resources to support) other people's products in order to keep their customers happy, but that does not mean they are going to buy something like VMS to save it. Much more likely that they will have their salesmen spend the needed additional time with the customer pointing out the direction VMS is headed and pushing them to port to an all IBM solution. That's called marketing. > AEF UPPERCASE AND PROUD OF IT! You could always buy a new keyboard where the capslock wasn't stuck. I know of no ne who actually writes in all caps, although ee cummings dir write in all lowercase. :-) bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:59:50 -0700 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Re: OT: IBM looking at Macintosh Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:12:26 -0700, Bill Gunshannon wrote: > IBM supports lots of different OSes. They have never bought any of them. > IBM owns the OSes it created. I am aware of no OS currently owned by IBM > that originated in some other company. Add to that the fact that IBM > shows > no sign of porting any of their current non-OS software, like DB2, to > VMS. > Thye are willing to support (and have the resources to support) other > people's products in order to keep their customers happy, but that does > not mean they are going to buy something like VMS to save it. Much more > likely that they will have their salesmen spend the needed additional > time > with the customer pointing out the direction VMS is headed and pushing > them > to port to an all IBM solution. That's called marketing. The only reason IBM would buy OpenVMS would be for the customer base, but that opportunity disappeared ca. 1992. -- PL/I for OpenVMS www.kednos.com ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.221 ************************