gauging interest in VAX 6000-530

From: Dave McGuire <mcguire_at_neurotica.com>
Date: Mon Oct 25 01:44:28 1999

  This is the last of these that I will entertain. You're a flame-baiter, and
while this has been fun, it's trashing the s/n ratio of the list rather badly.
The facts remain, and as long as people keep paying me for my advice, I'll
stick to what I've learned is the right path to take...in spite of Intel's
marketing department's best efforts.

On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Mike Cheponis wrote:
>What are the current models? What are the current specs?
>
>What new models are being designed? When will they be released?

  Look at their web server.

>> Now, you say "obsolete architecture"...Do you honestly believe that PCs are
>> "new" computers? That architecture was designed in 1980. And it wasn't
>> designed to be scalable. The VAX was designed only a couple of years earlier,
>> and it *was* designed to be scalable. That's why they're still around, still
>> in demand, still working hard in the face of constant marketing lies by Intel
>> and Microsoft.
>
>Ahh, 32 bits is obsolete today. In case you hadn't noticed, even DEC figured
>that out, and did the Alpha.

  What? Do you even understand the significance of data path width? You just
said that numbers between 0 and 2^32 are obsolete. That's just plain silly.
How many spreadsheets do YOU recalculate that require numbers larger than
4294967296? Do you really write code that handles so much in-core data that it
requires larger than a 32-bit pointer?

  64-bit processors are *different*. Better in some ways, but worse in others.

  Something does not magically become "obsolete" as soon as something new is
introduced. Do you take your 1998 car to the dump as soon as the 1999 cars
come out? Sure, the 1999 cars might be better in one way or another...progress
is inevitable. But do you take that 1998 care to the dump or not? It's really
no different.

>FACT: VAX is at end of life.

  If you're a salesman, maybe. I'm not a salesman. I don't base my "obsolete"
or "useless" judgements on the marketing decisions of vendors.

>> >What you failed to mention is that sgi is -only- selling NT these days,
>>
>> Wrong.
>
>Enlighten me, please. If I'm wrong, let me know. But simply calling me
>wrong without enlightening me is rude, IMHO.

  Irix is still supported and in development, as is Unicos. Neither of them
will be going away anytime soon, mostly due to pressure from the US government
and several very large customers. Something about "vital to national
security". Guess they figured out that PCs can't do *everything*, huh?

>> ...the back-room servers that you insist are obsolete, you mean?
>
>I -never- insisted the back-room servers were obsolete. Gee, I wish people
>would actually carefully read and then respond, rather than getting all
>worked up and then to respond to something that's not even claimed!

  Eeek, I guess I misunderstood you there...sorry...

>Excuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me! In case you hadn't noticed, there are more PCs than
>every other type of computer ever made, ever! Did you notice this?

  And I guess in your eyes that makes them GOOD, right?

  People don't buy PCs because they're well-designed. They don't buy them
because they're fast. Nor do they buy them because they're the right tool for
the job, or because they do anything particularly well. They buy them because
they're conditioned to believe that _that's what they're supposed to do_.

>FACT: And it wasn't designed by some little ass-kisser fresh out of college; it
>was designed by Intel.

  Oh, sorry. A WHOLE FUCKING COMPANY full of ass-kissers fresh out of
college. I stand corrected.


                 -Dave
Received on Mon Oct 25 1999 - 01:44:28 BST