NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/comp/sys/dec/6094

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-20 | 1.8 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!vtserf!creatures!csgrad.cs.vt.edu!acciai_g
From: [e-mail] (Guy Acciai)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec
Subject: AlphaVMS - Production Ready???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 20 Nov 92 15:03:03 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: usa
Organization: VPI&SU Computer Science Department, Blacksburg, VA
Lines: 26

I work for a local company that's about to expand it's production facilities
next year (12/93 time frame).  They are a DEC shop currently running VMS, and
given the size of the expansion a large hardware upgrade is planned (currently
using several uVAX 3900's).  Anyways, I suggested looking into Alpha boxes
for deployment next year.  This usage is 24hr/day 365days/year, and the plant
is VERY dependant on these machines being up & running reliably.  Anyways, our
DEC sales rep seriously downplayed using Alphaboxes & AlphaVMS in such an
enviroment.  He reasons were, "while the hardware's ok, the software will
not be ready/stable for such a production enviroment".  I was very surprised
by such a response given DEC's claims that VAX/VMS -> ALPHA/VMS ports are
supposed to be fairly trival and that our application is over a year after
commerical release.  Our software base includes (please, no flames for this):
Fortran, C, COBOL, FMS, DECNet (end nodes & routers), WPS, DTR, SNA, Ingres,
DECWindows, TCP/IP, and Pathworks.  Our rep, instead is pushing for 4000-100's
to later '(2-3) years' be replaced with alpha boxes.

The question (preferabbly to DEC product mangers & marketing types), Am I
being to agressive in migrating to Alpha a year from now (given my application)
or is my sales rep trying to boost sales now AND later???

I'm sure this one should generate some interesting debate..

                    Thanks Much,
                           GACE
                           ([e-mail])