However, anyone can submit a System
Improvement Request (SIR).
Also, I am not convinced that saying "OpenVMS V9.2-3 is available and
running on over 200 servers worldwide and the Cloud." on their homepage
gives the message you expect it to. If that's true, then the VMS user base appears to have finally undergone a massive reduction.
Simon.
Also, I am not convinced that saying "OpenVMS V9.2-3 is available and
running on over 200 servers worldwide and the Cloud." on their homepage
gives the message you expect it to. If that's true, then the VMS user base appears to have finally undergone a massive reduction.
But still 200 sounds very low.
Can't speak for VSI or even DEC but back in the days when I was a
mainframe application developer (long before the term Agile or even
Software Engineering) SPR was what it says. a performance report
or what they call bug reports today. SIR was a change the user was
looking for in an existing system.
On 10/07/2025 19:59, Simon Clubley wrote:
Also, I am not convinced that saying "OpenVMS V9.2-3 is available and
running on over 200 servers worldwide and the Cloud." on their homepage
gives the message you expect it to. If that's true, then the VMS user base >> appears to have finally undergone a massive reduction.
Does that include Ambassadors and the community VMDK?
On 2025-07-10, Chris Townley <[email protected]> wrote:
On 10/07/2025 19:59, Simon Clubley wrote:
Also, I am not convinced that saying "OpenVMS V9.2-3 is available and
running on over 200 servers worldwide and the Cloud." on their homepage
gives the message you expect it to. If that's true, then the VMS user
base appears to have finally undergone a massive reduction.
Does that include Ambassadors and the community VMDK?
If it does, it means the quoted number is even worse. :-(
If anyone from VSI is reading this, could you have a word with your
marketing people and get them to fix this ? A stagnant number from one
month after launch is not what you want to be seeing 6 months later.
Also, please remind them that if they continue to publish a number
there, it needs to be updated on a regular basis.
If anyone from VSI is reading this, could you have a word with your
marketing people and get them to fix this ? A stagnant number from
one month after launch is not what you want to be seeing 6 months later.
Also, please remind them that if they continue to publish a number there,
it needs to be updated on a regular basis.
On 2025-07-11, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
If anyone from VSI is reading this, could you have a word with your
marketing people and get them to fix this ? A stagnant number from
one month after launch is not what you want to be seeing 6 months later.
Also, please remind them that if they continue to publish a number there,
it needs to be updated on a regular basis.
I see it's still at 200 so I have just contacted them to bring it
to their attention. Let's see if that is ignored or if they do
something about it.
On 2025-07-14, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
On 2025-07-11, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
If anyone from VSI is reading this, could you have a word with your
marketing people and get them to fix this ? A stagnant number from
one month after launch is not what you want to be seeing 6 months later. >>>
Also, please remind them that if they continue to publish a number there, >>> it needs to be updated on a regular basis.
I see it's still at 200 so I have just contacted them to bring it
to their attention. Let's see if that is ignored or if they do
something about it.
Still no change on the website, or even a reply from VSI.
Oh, well. At least I tried.
On 7/17/2025 8:07 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
On 2025-07-14, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-
Earth.UFP> wrote:
On 2025-07-11, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-
Earth.UFP> wrote:
If anyone from VSI is reading this, could you have a word with your
marketing people and get them to fix this ? A stagnant number from
one month after launch is not what you want to be seeing 6 months
later.
Also, please remind them that if they continue to publish a number
there,
it needs to be updated on a regular basis.
I see it's still at 200 so I have just contacted them to bring it
to their attention. Let's see if that is ignored or if they do
something about it.
Still no change on the website, or even a reply from VSI.
Oh, well. At least I tried.
Given the time of year, then it could be in an inbox waiting
for someone to get back from summer vacation ...
On 7/10/2025 2:59 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
Also, I am not convinced that saying "OpenVMS V9.2-3 is available and
running on over 200 servers worldwide and the Cloud." on their homepage
gives the message you expect it to. If that's true, then the VMS user base >> appears to have finally undergone a massive reduction.
Note that the VMS user base consist of:
x86-64 running VSI VMS 9.2-3
x86-64 running VSI VMS older 9.x
Itanium running VSI VMS 8.4-2Lx
Alpha running VSI VMS 8.4-2Lx
Itanium running HP VMS 8.x
Alpha running HP/CPQ/DEC VMS 6.x-8.x (I assume noone run 1.x)
VAX running CPQ/DEC VMS 4.x-7.x (I assume noone run 1.x-3.x)
Likely a lot VMS customers are testing VMS x86-64 but production
has not yet been moved from Alpha/Itanium to x86-64.
So the number of VMS 9.2-3 systems is far less than the
number of VMS systems in total.
But still 200 sounds very low.
I believe 9.2-3 was GA 20-Nov-2024.
Or it simply disappeared into the ether, as does so much e-mail these
days.
On 7/17/25 12:15 PM, Arne Vajh�j wrote:
On 7/17/2025 8:07 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
Still no change on the website, or even a reply from VSI.
Oh, well. At least I tried.
Given the time of year, then it could be in an inbox waiting
for someone to get back from summer vacation ...
Or it simply disappeared into the ether, as does so much e-mail these
days. I've had enormous difficulty exchanging e-mail with some people
at VSI, though no problem at all with others.
I assumed when I first saw it that the 200 number was how many ran
E9.2-3 in field test, but in any case it's poorly worded and stale.
On 2025-07-17, Craig A. Berry <[email protected]> wrote:
On 7/17/25 12:15 PM, Arne Vajh�j wrote:
On 7/17/2025 8:07 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
Still no change on the website, or even a reply from VSI.
Oh, well. At least I tried.
Given the time of year, then it could be in an inbox waiting
for someone to get back from summer vacation ...
Or it simply disappeared into the ether, as does so much e-mail these
days. I've had enormous difficulty exchanging e-mail with some people
at VSI, though no problem at all with others.
I was worried about that, so I sent it via their contact form, so
I would know for sure they would receive it.
I assumed when I first saw it that the 200 number was how many ran
E9.2-3 in field test, but in any case it's poorly worded and stale.
Very strongly agree. It gives the exact opposite impression of what
they were trying to say.
On 2025-07-18, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
On 2025-07-17, Craig A. Berry <[email protected]> wrote:
On 7/17/25 12:15 PM, Arne Vajh�j wrote:
On 7/17/2025 8:07 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
Still no change on the website, or even a reply from VSI.
Oh, well. At least I tried.
Given the time of year, then it could be in an inbox waiting
for someone to get back from summer vacation ...
Or it simply disappeared into the ether, as does so much e-mail these
days. I've had enormous difficulty exchanging e-mail with some people
at VSI, though no problem at all with others.
I was worried about that, so I sent it via their contact form, so
I would know for sure they would receive it.
I assumed when I first saw it that the 200 number was how many ran
E9.2-3 in field test, but in any case it's poorly worded and stale.
Very strongly agree. It gives the exact opposite impression of what
they were trying to say.
It _still_ says 200 servers. :-(
Anyone else want to have a go at contacting them because they are
clearly not listening to me.
Simon.
On 31.07.2025 20:17, Simon Clubley wrote:
It _still_ says 200 servers. :-(
Anyone else want to have a go at contacting them because they are
clearly not listening to me.
Probably the Gorham constant, https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.vms/c/SLpyJ7hEex0/m/9QfGnew2vXEJ
has been recalibrated to 200
(from the mythical 411000 of yore)
On 2025-08-01, Michael Kraemer <[email protected]> wrote:
On 31.07.2025 20:17, Simon Clubley wrote:
It _still_ says 200 servers. :-(
Anyone else want to have a go at contacting them because they are
clearly not listening to me.
Probably the Gorham constant,
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.vms/c/SLpyJ7hEex0/m/9QfGnew2vXEJ
has been recalibrated to 200
(from the mythical 411000 of yore)
Maybe. The figure might be more accurate than we realise. I had another
go at contacting them, this time via email, and they are still ignoring
me.
The VSI website has been updated and now says:
|OpenVMS V9.2-3 is available and running on hundreds of servers worldwide and |the Cloud. Join the transformation and virtualize your OpenVMS environment!
Given that this release has been available for over 6 months, I am not convinced the above reads any better.
Am I expecting too much here, or would you expect the above to read well
over a thousand by now (and ideally several thousand) or is the remaining
VMS user base now much smaller than it was even, say, 5-10 years ago ?
On 08.08.2025 19:43, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
And "hundreds of" is undoubtedly correct. As it strictly speaking
just say more than two hundred.
Some readers may assume that hundreds imply less than thousand. But
that is reading between the lines.
No need to read between, just stay on line.
In my part of the universe "several hundred" means just that,
"less than thousand".
And "hundreds of" is undoubtedly correct. As it strictly speaking
just say more than two hundred.
Some readers may assume that hundreds imply less than thousand. But
that is reading between the lines.
On 8/8/2025 2:21 PM, Michael Kraemer wrote:
No need to read between, just stay on line.
In my part of the universe "several hundred" means just that,
"less than thousand".
What do you call the year 1999? The year one thousand nine hundred and
ninety nine?
On 8/8/2025 2:21 PM, Michael Kraemer wrote:
On 08.08.2025 19:43, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
And "hundreds of" is undoubtedly correct. As it strictly speaking
just say more than two hundred.
Some readers may assume that hundreds imply less than thousand. But
that is reading between the lines.
No need to read between, just stay on line.
In my part of the universe "several hundred" means just that,
"less than thousand".
What do you call the year 1999? The year one thousand nine hundred and
ninety nine?
:-)
Arne
Certainly not "several hundred years after Jesus was born".
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 04:08:25 |
| Calls: | 12,099 |
| Calls today: | 7 |
| Files: | 15,003 |
| Messages: | 6,517,890 |