HP Discontinue OpenVMS 238
simpz writes "The register is reporting that 'the ancient but trustworthy server operating system' OpenVMS has been discontinued. From the article: 'HP never really promoted its acquisition and OpenVMS suffered from a lack of development compared to HP-UX, itself suffering from competition from Linux. It was only a matter of time, but it's a sad end. Many of its old-time fans, your correspondent included, cherished a hope HP would move it to x86-64 – but since development moved to India in 2009, OpenVMS has been living on borrowed time. Now, it's run out.'"
When will it be open-sourced? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:When will it be open-sourced? (Score:4, Insightful)
HP already put those into a new product: http://h17007.www1.hp.com/us/en/enterprise/servers/management/insight-control/index.aspx
Re: When will it be open-sourced? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, R.I.P. to he best OS ever... This makes me sad...
Re: (Score:3)
Just look to Windows. Just as IBM(rot -1) = HAL, VMS(rot 1) = WNT. VMS and Windows NT were both developed by Dave Cutler (who hated UNIX).
Re:When will it be open-sourced? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just look to Windows. Just as IBM(rot -1) = HAL, VMS(rot 1) = WNT. VMS and Windows NT were both developed by Dave Cutler (who hated UNIX).
The original Windows NT (3.51?) was a pretty good OS. After the first release though it became Microsoftized. I don't know what Cutler's involvement with that was. However, the real beauty of VMS wasn't so much it's architecture (though that had a lot of good points) but the incredible quality of DEC's implementation. Bugs were for the competition.
"Cutler hated Unix" probably sounds like Neanderthal blasphemy to most Slahsdotters, but there were plenty of reasons to hate Unix in the 80's. The big split (AT&T vs. BSD style), numerous other incompatibilities (later overcome to a large extent by GNU utilities), horribly inefficient, bad security even for (largely) pre-Internet days, and practically non-existent documentation. Take it from an old fart who was there - any Unix of the last 15-20 years is definitely not your father's Unix.
Re:When will it be open-sourced? (Score:4, Interesting)
However, the real beauty of VMS wasn't so much it's architecture (though that had a lot of good points) but the incredible quality of DEC's implementation. Bugs were for the competition.
While I used VMS extensively and liked it in many ways, this is just silly.
When VMS 4.0 was released (the first version to include DCL command line editing), we had some unexplained crashes in our cluster. We eventually tracked it down to a bug in the command line editor (yes, it ran at least partially in kernel space). We had a local "competition" to see who could find the shortest number of keystrokes that would crash the system. The winner: 4. Yes, you could crash VMS 4.0 by getting an unprivileged command prompt and typing 4 characters (didn't even need to hit RETURN).
The bug was fixed in 4.1.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:When will it be open-sourced? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:When will it be open-sourced? (Score:4, Interesting)
DCL didn't run in kernel space, it ran as supervisor code (the four levels were user, supervisor, exec, and kernel). DCL sat above the stack in the user's address space (the user had two address spaces) so when it ran a command the command code was loaded into the regular user heap and executed without starting a new process. The command would just "return" at the end and you'd be back to the command interpreter.
Anyway, if you could crash the whole system with DCL the problem was likely in QIO, not in DCL.
Re:When will it be open-sourced? (Score:4, Informative)
I've seen VMS source code. It is not pretty stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
Wonder how many fiches would be needed for the current OS'es? Pretty big box, I would think...
Re: (Score:2)
Because that was not really a stable solution and X on the console was useless anyway, we decided to disable X. Which led to all our programmers not being able to link any console program anymore. For some reason, disabling X on the conso
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:When will it be open-sourced? (Score:4, Interesting)
The real big difference I felt between Unix and VMS was the orientation. VMS was fully intended to be what we'd today call an enterprise system. It was for corporate office to run as a server, for database management, for batch processing, etc. Unix was oriented towards small departmental computing. Late 80s had Unix growing up a bit more but it still had a much looser feel to it whereas VMS felt like you needed a suit and tie. At that time too Unix was pretty efficient, it really depended on what you were doing though; lots of users or heavy duty I/O and VMS tended to win, whereas few users and Unix felt more responsive. Unix was also always more open; cheaper, more third party applications, free development tools, etc. It changed in early 90s though when Unix got that corporate feel and all the big players wanted a piece of the pie and started splitting into factions.
Re: (Score:3)
...However, the real beauty of VMS wasn't so much it's architecture...
Re: (Score:2)
> The original Windows NT (3.51?) was a pretty good OS.
I don't disagree, but there were at least a couple of versions of NT before that. Namely (that I remember of) 3.5 and 3.1 before, which I was using around 94-95.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I wonder too. Perhaps some of "Open"VMS can be ported into FreeVMS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeVMS
that's long dead (Score:3)
that's the bones of a project that died in 2010, nothing useful there
Never hacked? (Score:4, Interesting)
Last time I heard VMS had never been hacked. Is that still the case?
It was the best OS I ever worked with. It'd be nice if they open sourced it.
Re: (Score:3)
When I worked on it the main reason was that it didn't support most of the normal ways to remotely log in to systems. You couldn't telnet to it by default for example. Early versions were hopelessly insecure. For example it was easy to tell when logging in whether the username you entered was in SYSUAF.DAT by waiting for the login process to read the file to the end.
Re:Never hacked? (Score:4, Informative)
VMS was hacked, but it is certainly rare. https://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-1989-04.html
Re: (Score:2)
There was a big VMS worm before the famous Unix one. The early DECnet essentially had zero security. Basically the worm involved telling the remote system to run a command script. The network security design seemed to be "only connect your network to people you trust", which is strange given the security emphasis elsewhere in the OS.
Re: (Score:2)
The early days had its share of issues (back when it was just VMS). But once those were sorted out it was pretty secure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Never hacked? (Score:4, Informative)
Last time I heard VMS had never been hacked. Is that still the case?
It was the best OS I ever worked with. It'd be nice if they open sourced it.
Umm Kevin Mitnick?
http://www.openvms.org/faqs/OpenVMS-Hack-FAQ.html [openvms.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I heard VMS had never been hacked. Is that still the case?
It was the best OS I ever worked with. It'd be nice if they open sourced it.
When I was at Argonne Labs in the 80's, there was a rumor of someone sending out fake update/patch tapes made to look like they shipped from DEC. I'm not sure if anyone fell for it, or even if they did, what the "hackers" could get. Only universities were on the DECNET at that time.
Re: (Score:2)
VMS was no more secure than UNIX, and arguably less so (because its security and configuration was a lot more complex).
Which Unix variety are you talking about and which year(s)? It makes a big difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Mitnick was notorious for hacking into VMS.
Re:Never hacked? (Score:4, Interesting)
uhhh. no.
Mitnick social engineered his way into VMS. he did not "hack in". He used the telephone and convinced a flunky to start a command interpreter on the modem line he was dialed into. Clever? yes. A skilled hack? only of humans.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, 4.7 was where I started with it. I wasn't aware of the earlier history.
Open source it... (Score:3)
Is it just me or has it become tradition for HP to kill things lately? It really makes me wonder what they plan on actually selling...
Re: (Score:3)
It will be in Harvey Normans for 130 bucks in a few weeks time.
Re: (Score:3)
Their stock, just as soon as the id10ts on wall street get done applauding them for eliminating all of their expenses.
Re: (Score:2)
HP is essentially a printer ink company. Supporting operating systems or services is a luxury :-)
Re: (Score:2)
The writing was on the wall for a long time. After they bought Compaq (which previously bought DEC), HP got a ridiculous number of proprietary OSes and server architectures under its umbrella, and they had no sane approach to manage them. On day #1 they should have announced that they were going to merge all the major features from Tru64 (Digital Unix) and HP-UX together i
Re: (Score:2)
More like Open2VMS
India where projects come to die (Score:4, Insightful)
Its always the same when a huge software project moves out of the EU or US to india its bound to die. India has some great engineers but 90% of those graduating have just memorized stuff and passed an exam which has a pass rate as long as you have 33/100. Obviously this creates a lot of worthless engineers.
From personal experience: One our customers the ESA (European Space Agency) had some servers and storage arrays running on SUN hardware. We just managed the hardware and operating systems. The software/middleware was all responsibility of the customer who had outsourced this part of the job to Tech-Mahindra (and india based outsourcing giant). These guys would mail us asking us how to change their password and how to "copy" a file from the server while having ssh access (and this happend every few days). If you have such guys working on such important systems I don't even want to know whats happening on development level. Its true that in every team you have a few top-scorers but not knowing how to change your password on a unix system and "managing" that system day to day tells me there is something seriously wrong.
Re:India where projects come to die (Score:5, Insightful)
Indians are fine for grunt work, and there are some truly bright engineers there, but too many companies see that they can get 5 engineers for the price of one and think they'll get 5x the productivity... instead they find out they get 1/2 the productivity.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, there are plenty of Americans like that too. There are people I went to college with that I wouldn't take on as an unpaid intern, since their knowledge is limited exclusively to which "magic button sequences" to push in MSSQL, IIS, Cisco IOS or, if they were really lucky, one distro of Linux. Actually, some of the *teachers* I've known only taught because they couldn't get hired at any company (that would survive long enough to give them a paycheck).
And it's not just new people - I've been on co
Re: (Score:3)
I hear some anti Indian engineer rants sometimes from Indians in the US. It's not racist, it's basically pointing out the flaws in the educational system or the attitudes of the outsourcing companies themselves.
Not surprised OpenVMS lasted this long (Score:5, Funny)
I'm not surprised that it took HP so long to figure out
SYS$SYSTEM:SHUTDOWN.COM
on the whole O/S.
After all, it has a dollar sign in it and they're not particularly astute with cash lately.
Re: (Score:2)
$ mc opccrash
E
I sense a really insignificant disturbance... (Score:5, Funny)
I sense a really insignificant disturbance in the force as if a few voices suddenly cried out in terror and then went back to stroking their beards.
I think that is last call.... (Score:2)
Get your requests in for the hobbyist licenses and for any emulators you want to run. Grab the patches and licenses while they are available.
A pity HP was so indifferent to VMS. Its user base was as loyal as any I've seen, often foreswearing all suitors. The VMS documentation is enviable to anyone accustomed to Unix. I could appreciate much of its magnificence even if I didn't have the heart to love it.
Now comes the decent into the long dark.
Re: (Score:2)
It's much bigger than you think. I was surprised myself.
Re: (Score:2)
They added an 8th guy?
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't that many years ago that it was at least a billion dollar a year business for HP alone. It might have grown if HP would have cared.
You thinking about taking that act to Vegas? Don't give up your day job.
RIP VMS (Score:5, Interesting)
There were few operating systems that handled loose-clustered networking as elegantly as VMS. Want to centralize user credentials? Easy, just place SYSUAF.DAT on a shared volume. And since the files could have structure, you could lock individual user records for editing rather than the whole file.
Another great feature was the concept of "quorum". Quorum, as in the organizational term of the number of people present at a meeting necessary for it to be an official meeting of an organization, was the number of reachable hosts necessary to conduct business. Say you had a redundant banking site - and the link between them would go down. If they are a redundant configuration, they would continue to process transactions - with their database quickly diverging. Using quorum nodes, you could set up three hosts on three sites - two major server setups and a simple workstation somewhere central - and voila, no single point of failure.
Besides, there is a magnificent book, "OpenVMS Internals and Data Structures", which so elegantly and wonderfully describes operating system design.
I really, really hope that OpenVMS could be open-sourced and this codebase might serve as the base for a community-written x86 port.
Re: (Score:2)
I really, really hope that OpenVMS could be open-sourced and this codebase might serve as the base for a community-written x86 port.
Forget it. Even if HP did open source it there wouldn't be enough people willing to support it, just a few old diehards. Kids today think that in the beginning God created *nix and all else is man's blasphemy.
Re: (Score:2)
[...] And since the files could have structure, [...]
As much as I loved VMS for its design and its features (hello $ENQ, $DEQ) I truly hated its filesystem .
Opening a few hundred files in a row on UNIX would go with a snap, on VMS you could go on a long vacation and return before the task had finished.
And that because of its structured filesystem.
Re:RIP VMS (Score:4, Insightful)
There are less illiterates than people who can't read.
No, there are fewer illiterates than people who can't read.
Re: (Score:2)
You just won a washing machine, but I'm afraid you'll have to come and pick it up yourself
Re: (Score:2)
And that because of its structured filesystem.
Only files that you chose to make structured were structured. Most files were flat (the only choice in Unix of course). Why did you need to open hundreds of structured files?
Re: (Score:2)
There were more, I don't remember anymore, been a while after all.
All I remember is, I ended up caching file channels for frequently used (flat) files using raw $QIO for open/read/write operations.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember in 1986 this scientist I worked with had a data reduction procedure he did by hand with a pocket calculator. Took about a week. So I wrote him a fortran program to do the lot on a VAX 11/730 (the slowest computer in the world). It still took three hours to run.
Re: (Score:2)
The 11/730 was mostly made for small software developer houses who couldn't afford either an 11/750 or an 11/780, but needed access to VMS and the fairly comprehensive, 32-bit architecture of the VAX. It really was a terribly slow machine, but a neat hack.
Re: (Score:2)
I recall on that 730 it was so easy to work out where in SYSUAF.DAT my account was located by the delay between Username: and Password: when logging in.
VMS was doomed when HP bought it (Score:5, Interesting)
When the amount of development your OS gets suffers "compared to HP-UX" you are in astonishingly deep trouble. I have had three run-ins with HP-UX, first in 1998, next in 2004, and finally in 2010 (when my current job retired all it's existing HP servers and moved to Solaris). When I encountered HP-UX the first time, in 1998, it seemed to be at least 10 years behind the times. Very little had changed in 2004, which meant that it was falling farther and farther behind each year. In 2010 it seemed little better than it had been in 2004, and I guess that management agreed, since we finally cut the cord and moved on to something that was, at least by comparison, more up to date.
I also used OpenVMS in the early 2000s, and it was capable, but idiosyncratic (record structured files were a PITA, and the file versioning was no replacement for proper version control. I really liked logical names, however, and the global symbol table was useful). It had a head start on lots of other OS's with respect to clustering features (cluster wide file system, message queues, and distributed lock management was all built-in), but much of the userland was GNU stuff ported over on the POSIX layer. DEC seemed to have given up on the whole "innovation" thing and was just milking existing big contracts.
Re: (Score:2)
HP/UX wasn't really developed as had all manner of acquired and licensed third-party bolt-ons (often 'lite' version too) thrown on, Perl 6's flounderings have nothing on the slow motion train wreck that is HP/UX urban sprawl of directionless feature bloat
Re: (Score:2)
They must surely have developed their IPSEC implementation in-house, for it is too bad to have originated anywhere but inside HP.
Re: (Score:2)
When the amount of development your OS gets suffers "compared to HP-UX" you are in astonishingly deep trouble.
This is so very very true. HP-UX hasn't had any meaningful update for over 10 years now, since v11 came out. And the hardware is obsolete, and appears to be on its way out as well - I've heard nothing regarding new IA64 chips from intel, and HP stupidly bet the farm on Intel not being more focused on destroying competing RISC business than they were on new technology.
An epitaph for software (Score:3)
That's how they always kill it: they outsource to the perceived cheaper labor, which lets them claim that the product got discriminated against by the market, when the market is reacting to the fact that the project got farmed out, thus is unlikely to have frequent updates, thus is a dead-end project because users won't get the support they need or a competitive product. RIP
Re: (Score:2)
"We cancelled it because ratings were awful (after we moved it to a 2 AM time slot)"
VMS and the US Military? (Score:2)
About 5 years ago, an HP instructor told us that the US Military wanted VMS to never be sunset.
I wonder what changed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
five years ago to five years from now is a decade of support from HP from then. military replaces systems too...
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe HP decided that they didn't really care what the US military wanted. Even the US military isn't a big enough customer to carry a commercial-grade general-purpose OS all by itself.
A sad moment in the history of computing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I began to discover features, flexibility and power that make other modern operating systems seem primitive.
It frustrates me that most people these days think *nix is the be all and end all of OS'es. Other things and other approaches are possible! Don't get me wrong, I know that VMS is a lost cause (and frankly I haven't used it in many years), and I like the better modern *nixes (the ones in the 80's were awful though). However it seems like there is nothing left but Windows and various *nixes, which limits people's thinking. Okay, somewhere in the bowels of various computer rooms are also z/OS machines, but I k
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget IBM's as400/IBM i/or whatever its called this week. Plus HP still has the nonstop too.
Great feature - File versions (Score:2)
One of my favorite features of VMS was file versions. Each file had a version number. As many of you probably remember, each file had a version number. So you could have:
NEEDBEER.TXT;1
NEEDBEER.TXT;2
NEEDBEER.TXT;3
That feature combine with some logical commands, such as PURGE/KEEP=2, would keep the two most recent versions of the file. I wish there was such a command in OS X instead of having to delete all older versions manually.
This is a sad day, and I miss and will miss VMS.
Re: (Score:2)
Uhm, Tops 10/20 as well as RSX-11 (father of VMS) had that before VMS and they were borrowed from Generation Data Groups (GDG) on Mainframes. TSS and RSTS AFAIK also had it.
Re: (Score:2)
If you mean TSS/8, it didn't have file versions, and neither did RSTS/E (and actually I don't remember it on T10 either but I barely used that). But yeah T20 definitely had versions and was the inspiration for the later systems (RSX/VMS quietly accept T20 filename syntax too -- <dir>file.ext.ver instead of [dir]file.ext;ver). Very very useful feature -- saved my ass plenty of times.
Re: (Score:2)
I started out using vms and only later did I learn (and move to) unix. I worked at DEC for over 5 yrs and my last 2 were at the mill (mlo). when I eventually moved from vax/vms to unix, I could not get used to NOT having the semicolon versions there to save your ass. I had to write wrappers around things to create the illusion of versions ;)
I later gave that up and now I'm thinking in unix terms. I would not even remember the old vms commands anymore, even though I lived by them for many, many years.
DEC
Re: (Score:2)
KESU and security (Score:2)
There was a reason why it was originally called VAX/VMS -- the operating system and the Vax architecture were developed simultaneously; the hardware supported KESU (Kernel, Executive, Supervisor, User, for those of you who are non-aligned), the x86 chip didn't. I think this is the root of the security problem that WNT suffered when VMS was ported to Microsoft's product. Each mode allowed a subset of the total instruction set, with certain instructions (such as writing to device drivers, for example) deni
VMS VERSION 4.1: (An official DEC memo) (Score:3)
VMS VERSION 4.1: (An official DEC memo)
Please stop submitting SPR's. This is our system. We designed it,
we build it, and we use it more than you do. If there are some
features you think might be missing, if the system isn't as
effective as you think it could be, TOUGH. Give it back, we don't
need you. See figure 1.
(slashdot whitespace filter won't allow the ASCII art middle finger graphic that should be here)
Figure 1.
Forget about your silly problems, let's take a look at some of the
features of the VMS operating system.
1) Options. We've got lots of them. So many in fact, that you need
two strong people to carry the documentation around. So many
that it will be a cold day in hell before half of them are used.
So many that you are probably not going to do your work right
anyway. However, the number of options isn't all that important,
because we picked some interesting values for the options and
called them...
2) Defaults. We put a lot of thought into our defaults. We like
them. If we didn't, we would have made something else be the
default. So keep your cotten-picking hands off our defaults.
Don't touch. Consider them mandatory. "Mandatory defaults" has
a nice ring to it. Change them and your system crashes, tough.
See figure 1.
3) Language Processors. They work just fine. They take in source,
and often produce object files as a reward for your efforts. You
don't like the code? Too bad! You can even try to call
operating system services from them. For any that you can't, use
the assembler like we do. We spoke to the language processor
developers about this, they think a lot like we do. They said
"See figure 1.".
4) Debuggers. We've got debuggers, one we support and one we use.
You shouldn't make mistakes anyway, it is a waste of time. We
don't want to hear anything about debuggers, we're not
interested. See figure 1.
5) Error logging. Ignore it. Why give yourself an ulcer? You don't
want to give us the machine to get the problem fixed and we probably
can't do it anyway. Oh, and if something breaks between 17:00 and
18:00 or 9:30 and 10:30 or 11:30 and 13:30 or 14:30 and 15:30 don't
waste your time calling us, we're out. See figure 1.
6) Command Language. We designed it ourselves, it's perfect. We
like it so much we put our name on it, DCL - Digital's Command
Language. In fact we're so happy with it, we designed it once
for each of our operating systems. We even try to keep it the
same from release to release, sometimes we blow it though. See
figure 1.
7) Real Time Performance. We got it. Who else could have done such
a good job? So the system seems sluggish with all those priority
18 processes, no problem, just make them priority one. Anyway,
realtime isn't important anymore like it used to be. We changed
our groups name to get rid of the word realtime, we told all our
realtime users to see figure 1 a long time ago.
In conclusion, stuff your SPR. Love VMS or leave it, but DON'T complain.
--
R.I.P. Malcolm
Re:no (Score:5, Funny)
Indeed, what will their customer use now?
Re: (Score:2)
probably some flavor of linux (redhat , oracle, suse, ubuntu...) possibly Solaris, AIX, Free/Open/Net BSD, HPUX, worst case Windows Server 2012.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably Linux, most likely Red Hat. Maybe Windows Server. Nobody migrates *to* Solaris, AIX or HPUX any more, and you have maybe a 50% chance that your Unix/Linux commercial software will support BSD. If you're lucky.
Re: (Score:2)
And they certainly knew their history:
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/year-2000/leap.html [hp.com] :-)
Re: (Score:2)
VMS had quite a few customers, but much like z/OS, they tend to be in use with systems that you don't notice until they fail - which means, you very rarely notice them. Banks, stock exchanges, power utilities, that sort of thing.
Re: (Score:3)
Had being the important tense. I work as a computer sub contractor. I have been in a LOT of branches of banks, power utilities, big box stores, restaurants, telephone exchanges, defence sites, that sort of thing. The only place I have seen a VMS machine this decade is a certain video store chain who's parent company went bankrupt (and stopped supporting/upgrading their IT) last decade.
Re: (Score:2)
Up until a couple of years ago VMS was still used in a large Australian national grocery chain to handle the back-end supply chain. They were attempting to replace it while I was there. I think they decided to port it more because they were concerned by end-of-life issues than any shortfall in performance or reliability. OLTP was handled by ACMS, and it just worked. I don't think the production systems went down at any point for the duration of my contract.
Re: (Score:2)
Think of it as an opportunity. With this many morons spending that amount of money, if you can't divert some into your pocket, there is something wrong with your approach. Perhaps you are holding onto childish ideas like ethics and pride.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The point was genuinely a good one at that time. There were a lot of facilities in VMS that made some really elegant transaction processing, for instance, available with even a relatively few lines of code. Besides - keep in mind, Unix was seriously fragmented at the time. BSD/SysV and a ton of varieties of those. All immature and inefficient. Unix in the days of VAX and PDP-11 is nothing like Unix in the last two decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Beautiful women would throw themselves at VMS programmers and admins until you finally had to say enough, enough!
Never happened to us RSX11M guys.
Re: (Score:2)
For the record, I'm 25. Got into VMS about a decade ago, when I found a VAXstation 3100 in a dumpster. But I'm not entirely representative in general. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Slacker. It was 1984. Granting it was being generous to call what was on the microcomputers of the day an 'operating system'.
Re: (Score:2)
I was thinking the same thing as you. College programming classes in the 80's (at UMBC [umbc.edu]) consisted of taking your assignment and writing out your logic by hand, signing up for terminal time, then coding it in Fortran.
Re: (Score:2)
HP has become the place where many tech eventually gets put to sleep forever. I wonder which one will be next?
hpux probably, as they only support itanium and itanium sales arn't that great. they should of ported their OS's to x86_64 but have stuck with itanium as they are half owner of the architecture despite the fact no one wants it oh and it pisses oracle of is another reason they stick with it. Put i predict they will soon end up just another x86 sever and prinet maker like their old ceo wanted due to lack of momnetum.
Re: (Score:2)
perhapses there weren't enough sales because it was on itanium.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that HP-UX is still the same today as it was in 1999.
Re: (Score:2)